Allowed

Indian Bank v. Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Power Systems

DRT27 Feb 2024OA/238/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's Original Application, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.44,92,738.31 with future interest and permitting recovery proceedings against the hypothecated vehicle and defendant properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.44,92,738.31 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant properties; costs awarded.

Indian Bank versus Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Power Systems — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY,2024

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.L.B. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 238 OF 202

¶4

Indian Bank,Gachibowli Branch, Plot No.12-16, Indira NagarCyber Apartments, Gachibowli^pO, Ranga Reddy District Hyderabad 500032, rep by its Power of Attorney Holder Ms.S. Kalyani. ...........Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

1.	SriLakshmiVenkateswara^powersSystems, Prop: Mr. KethavathRaviNayak, H.No.9-1-316/7PrashantNagar, Langer House, Mehidipatnam, Hyderabad 500008.
2.	Mr. KethavathRaviNayak S/o.Mr. K.Manyam, Prop:SriLakshmi Venkateswara PowersSystems, H.No.9-1-316/7 PrashantNagar,LangerHouse Mehidipatnam,Hyderabad 500008,
	Alsoat: Mr. KetahvathRaviNayak S/o Mr. K.Manyam, No.1-176 Katavaram,Addakal, Mahaboobnagar507382. Defendants.
	Counselfor theApplicant :Mr.RV Subba Rao
	Defendants :Exparte. /)! {/ 'r*

oA.23812023

ORDER

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a} total sum^{ot Rs.44,92,738'31ps jointlyand severallyfrom the} defendants^{1 & 2 with interest@l4o/oper annum quarterly} rests from^{the date of Application till the date of realisation} along^{with costs and sale of OA schedulehypothecated vehicle'}

¶11

Summons^{served on D1 & 2'} They were^{set ex-Parteon} 14.08.2023,^{as called absentand} no representation.

¶12

The Applicant^{Bank examined B' Ravi Kiran'SeniorManager as} AW-1 and^{marked 29 documentsthroughhim as Ex' A'1 to} Ex.A.29.

¶13

Learned^{Counsel for the applicant bank reported orders may be} passed on merits,^{Perusedthe materialplaced on record'}

¶14

The^{point that arises for consideration is:-}

¶15

Whether^{the Appticant Bank is entitled} for the^{claim madein the OA against} the^{Defendantsand OA Schedule} hYPothecated^vehicle?

¶16

As stated^{supra, defendants remained ex-parte' The Evidence} Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitals in the documents viz'' Exs' A1} toA.29markedonbehalfoftheApplicantBankclinchesthe claim of^{the ApplicantBankagainst the Defendants' Hence' I} holdthattheDefendantsarejointlyandseverallyliabletopay the OA claim^{to the Applicant Bank with future interestand} '!2/*t\

cosls.

oA.23812023

In the result, the present Original Application No.23g/2023 allowed as under: -

¶21

i) the defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.44,92,738.31ps with future interest @10olo p.a. simple from the date of application i.e., 25.t7.2022 till the date of realization;

¶22

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for recovery of its dues;

¶23

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶24

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶25

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶26

Issue Recovery Certificate accordin g ly,

¶27

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27th day of February, 2024).

¶28

,flr,'1

¶29

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Bank v. Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Power Systems

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Power Systems

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

South Indian Bank versus Gopinathan

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Sunshine Road Line

Bank of Baroda versus M/S M.S. Exports Glass

Canara Bank versus Maha Lakshmi Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Mrs.Malavath Prameela

Icici Bank Limited versus Sree Vaisihnavi Engineering Construction Pvt. Ltd.