Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (Pacs)

DRT12 Dec 2024OA/242/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in an originating application allowed the bank to recover outstanding loan dues and costs from the respondents, who were absent. The Tribunal held the applicant bank established its claim and is entitled to recover the total sum of Rs.7,24,23,300/- plus future interest and costs, and to proceed against hypothecated securities.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Applicant a total sum of Rs.7,24,23,300/- including future interest; issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Primary Agricultural… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE DAY OF DECEMBER' 2024

¶3

'.zTH

¶4

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA.No.242 ot 2023

¶6

Between:

¶7

Indian Overseas bank, Hanamkonda branch, D.No.2-5-614, D-Mart Side lane Subedari, Hanumakonda,

¶8

Telangana State - 506 001. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶9

Applicant

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

1, PrimaryAgriculturalCo-operative Society Ltd (PACS), Vangapahad, Rep by its President& CEO At Vangapahad village, Hasnaparthymandal,

¶12

Hanumakonda district - 506 006.

¶13

Sri Merugu Rajesh (President PACS) S/o MeruguKomriah, aged major, Male, R/o 4-164, Vangapahad Village, Hasnaparthymandal, Hanumakondadist - 506 006.

¶14

Sri PingliliRaji Reddy, (CEO PACS) S/o P. Ram Reddy, Aged major, male, R/o 1-99, Vangapahad village, Hasnaparthy Mandal, Hanumakondadist- 06.

¶15

Counsel for the Parties:

¶16

For the Applicant

¶17

For the Defendants

¶18

.' r,'
,?i gf[-
i i i{". 't'
ii -s - a arn fltill
ii lli tl. * l2gEG&l u..
..",.,
l
. i..,..:i,, .,i oefendlgqS,, ,
\1.. i,i' .' :1",,- ,z6lFiai.i,, .
'l"q fuv ;'' ;;.lri'in''"
...,-j.-..
-"{,;,iit:;:,. ...

¶19

Sri Alluri Krishnam Raju

Expa rte

lOA.No.242/2023]|

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.7 ,24,23,3OOl- (Rupees Seven Crores Twenty Four Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred only) i.e.,

¶24

a) A sum of Rs.I,39,74,009/- in respect of loan account No.017303237000014 with interest @ 10.30o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

b) A sum of Rs.L,S3,0O,O7Z/- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000016 with interest @ 10.30% p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

c) A sum of Rs.77,30,892/- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000022 with interest @ 10.30o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

d) A sum of Rs.93,53,239l- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000023 with interest @ 10.30olo p.afrom date of application till the date of realization;

¶28

e) A sum of Rs.1,60,22,035/- in respect of loan accou nt No.No.017303237000030 with interest @ 10.30o/o p.a from date

¶29

of application till the date of realization;

¶30

f) A sum of Rs.65,85,170J2pfi& account 1/^{,b</sup> No. No.O 1730 3237000032 wiili'irfuerest .3Oo/o m date of *}

¶31

application till the date of reatizitionl 2 [lEC m

¶32

(OA. No.24212023)

¶33

g) A sum of Rs.34,57,882/- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000033 with interest @ 10.3Oo/op.afrom date of application till the date of realization;

¶34

and in default for sale of hypothecated assets and collateral securities as described in the schedule "A & B" to OA.

¶35

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is represented by defendants 2 and 3 availed term loan of Rs.3,60,00,000/-. The primary security offered is hypothecation of crops against which the short term loans were sanctioned. The defendants executed promissory note on 12.10.2017. The defendants executed deed of assignment assigning all its rights, titles and interests as described in the schedule to OA. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued revival letter dated 20.0t.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶36

Defendants No.1 to 3 called absent and set exparte on 24.07.2024.

¶37

Sri A. Sai KumarNaik, Asst. M exa m in ed herself as AW.1 and exhibi ''ffi,"run, which are 1? oE[mt

¶38

marked as Ex.A.1 to A.42.

¶39

(oA.No.2a2l2023 )

¶40

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶41

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?

¶42

Defendants remained 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.42. 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.

¶43

B. In the result, the present OA ls allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.7 ,24,23,3OO1- (Rupees Seven Crores Twenty Four Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred only) i.e.,

¶44

a) A sum of Rs.|,39,74,009/- in respect of loan account No. 0 1 7303237 00007 4 wit&in.Earest -@, 10. 3O% p.a from date r \ji'

¶45

. if:^a+.T.. -'.'r*,.",

¶46

of application till the dd{diUf reaili$tion;"f,,.^': .; -,j

¶47

' :i .'.^)l , -ri

¶48

(oA. No.24212023)

¶49

b) A sum of Rs.1,53,00,072l- in respect of loan account No.No.o17303237000016 with interest @ 10.30% p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶50

c) A sum of Rs.77,30,892/- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000022 with interest @ 10.30o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶51

d) A sum of Rs.93,53,239l- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000023 with interest @ 10.30olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶52

e) A sum of Rs,1,60,22,035/- in respect of loan account No.No.O17303237000030 with interest @ 10.30% p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶53

A sum of Rs.65,85,170.12ps in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000032 with interest @ 10.30olo p.afrom date of application till the date of realization;

¶54

s) A sum of Rs.34,57,882/- in respect of loan account No.No.017303237000033 with interest @ 10.30o/o p.afrom date of application till the date of realization;

¶55

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated mova bl I securities as described in schedule "A & B or the debt due' t*:'

¶56

,iF

¶57

(oA.No.242 /20231

¶58

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶59

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

¶60

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

¶61

Issue Recovery ceftificate accordingly.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶63

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of Dec,2024)

¶64

sd/ - (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶65

RUEEOP%
:9.,{^--_ffi
AliT^t, HY0.ErtP.BAD.

Indian Overseas Bank v. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (Pacs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (Pacs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Narsimha Poultry Farm and Feed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Mallu Ramchandra Reddy

The South Indian Bank Ltd. versus Mr. J. Gopal Rao

State Bank of India versus M/S. Om Sree Venkatanameswara Prelam Private Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Mantena Laboratories Ltd.

Mr Arepula Yadagiri versus Bank of Baroda