Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S. Srinivasa Packaging Industries

DRT18 Apr 2024OA/222/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of Rs. 1.52 crore from erstwhile borrowers and guarantors who defaulted on cash credit, term loan, and GECL facilities. The Defaulting Defendants were set ex-parte and held liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are directed to pay Rs. 1,52,88,587.27 with interest and proceed against hypothecated/mortgaged properties for realization.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Srinivasa Packaging Industries — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL'2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.222 OF 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

Bank of Maharashtra, Nizampet branch, Plot no.2/B, AS Raju nagar, High Tension lane, Nizampet Road, Kukatpallymandal, Medchal, Malkajgiri. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Srinivasa Packaging Industries, Represented by its proprietrix SmtsravanthiVasireddy, aged major, Occ: business, flat no.403A, A block, VertxSadguru Apartments, Nizampet road, Kukatpally, Medchal, Malkajgiri district, Telangana - 500 085.

¶10

SmtSrava nth iVasi reddy, Aged major, occ: business, flat no.4034, A block, VertxSadg uru Apartments, Nizampet road, Kukatpally, Medchal, Malkajgiri district, Telangana - 500 085.

¶11

Sri Srinivas Vasireddy, s/o Sri V. Krishna Prasad, aged major, occ: business, flat no.4034, A block, VertxSadguru Apartments, Nizampet road, Kukatpally, Medchal, Malkajgiri district, Telangana - 500 085.

¶12

(OA.No.222 of 2023)

¶13

SmtSammineniAnuradha, w/o Sri Sammineni Ramakrishna aged major, occ: business, H.No.B-3-3 19 / t0/2, flat no.303, Sai Sarathinagar, OppKeerthi Apartments, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad - 500 073.

¶14

Defendants

¶15

Counsel for the Parties:

¶16

For the Applicant Sri TSS Krishna For the Defendants Expafte

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,52,88,587.27ps (Rupees One Crore Fifty Two Lakhs Eighty Eight thousand Five hundred Eighty Seven and paise Twenty Seven only) i.e.,

¶19

a) A sum of Rs.1,33,02,186/- under cash credit loan account with interest @14.5olo p.awith monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶20

b) A sum of Rs.4,61,149.43ps underterm loan account with Interest @^{14.5olo p.a} with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶21

c) A sum of Rs.15, underGECL account with interest @ -':

¶22

14.5% with monthly te of application till the date of

¶23

realization;

¶24

(OA.No.222 of 2023)

¶25

and in default for sale of hypothecated properties and mortgaged

¶26

properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶27

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a firm represented by defendant^no.2 as^its proprietor availed cash credit of Rs.13,45,000/-. The defendants 3 & 4 stood as guarantors. The defendant no.1 represented by defendants executed demand^promissory note, deed^of hypothecation, guarantee agreement etc. The defendants/ mortgagors executed memorandum of equitable mortgage^of schedule mentioned properties. The defendants availed^{WCTL of} Rs.31,35,000/- on 23.06.2020 for which the defendants 2 &^{3 stood} as guarantors and executed necessary documents.^{Subsequently the} applicant bank enhanced the CC limit of^{Rs.1,30,00,000/-and New} term loan of Rs.40.00 lakhs. After availing the^{loan facilities, the} defendants failed to comply the terms of^{sanction, hence the} applicant bank was constrained to classify the^{account as NPA and} issued notices. Inspite of several requests and^demands,the defendants did not clear the outstanding.^{Hence this OA.}

¶28

Defendants No.1 to set exparte on 20.02.2024.

¶29

(OA.No.222 of 2023)

¶30

Shri P.K. Mahato, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.29.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶33

Defendants called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.29. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶34

B. In the result, the^present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶35

The Defendants are^jointly and severally^liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,52,88,587.27ps (Rupees One Crore Fifty thousand Five hundred Eighty Seven only) i.e.,

¶36

(OA.No.222 of 2023)

¶37

a) A sum of Rs.1,33,02,186/- under cash credit loan account with interest @14.5olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶38

b) A sum of Rs.4,61,149.43ps under term loan account with interest @ 14.5olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶39

c) A sum of Rs.15,25,428.84ps under GECL account with interest @ 14.5olo from date of application till the date of realization;

¶40

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables and mortgaged properties as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 to 4 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

t2. The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶43

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶44

Issue Recovery

¶45

(

¶46

(OA.No.222 of 2023)

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and^{pronounced by me in the open} couft on this the 18th day of April' 2024)

¶49

sdl - (G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶50

dvo:H^

¶51

as."<{,\ili,", DRT.T,^HYgEP,.BfrD.

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S. Srinivasa Packaging Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S. Srinivasa Packaging Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Pps Hospitality Services

State Bank of India versus Karleen Industries Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Aditya Upvc Manufacturerss

State Bank of India versus Sri. Motor Deepak Kumar

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S.Shanmukha Traders

State Bank of India versus M/S. Agro Food Chronicles Pvt. Ltd.