Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Spyksz Spa

DRT31 Jul 2024OA/317/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 20.25 lakhs plus interest and costs against a defaulting MSME proprietor and concerns over hypothecated movables.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 20,25,433.26 plus future interest; Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables and other properties; Recovery certificate issued.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Spyksz Spa — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 3ISTDAY OF IIJLY'2f,24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.3t7 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank, Represented by its Sr.Manager Sri P. ^Ctrandradas, S/o p. Ja'lpath, 1"qe-9^{37 years, 1s-1-47s/L,} 1" floor, OppMahaveer Jain Mandir, Old Feel Khana road, Begum bazar, Hyderabad _ 12.

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Spyksz Spa, Represented by its proprietor Sri K. Jahangeerbabu, 3-8-44I/ A, Suryodaya colony,

¶9

Mansoorabad village, LB nagar Main road, Hyderabad _ SOO 074.

¶10

Sri K. JahangeerBabu, s/o K. Ramulu, aged about 37 years, occ: business, R/o 2-2-Ig5/3/8, Ramakrishna nagar, Amberpet,' Hyderabad.

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the parties:

¶13

For the Applicant
TVK Murthy
For the Defendants
rte
31JUL Uf

¶14

(OA.No.317/2023)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.20,2s,433.26ps (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty five thousand four hundred thirty three and paise twenty six only) with subsequent interest @ L2o/o p.a with monthly rests from 01.10.2023 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶17

2, As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 availed MSME term loan of Rs.14.00 lakhs on 28.12.20t7. the defendants executed demand promissory note and term loan agreement and letter of hypothecation dated 28.L2,20L7. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued revival notice dated 08.12.2020. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶18

3.
Defendants No.1 and 2 ca
exparte on 25.04.2024.
i#D
q
3t
JAL M

¶19

(oA.No.3ul2023)

¶20

Sri P. Charandas, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.12.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶22

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

¶23

7' Defendants ca[ed absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.12. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entired to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs,

¶24

B. In the resurt, the present oA is a[owed with costs, as under:

¶25

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2\25,433.26ps (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty five thirty three Sry+x$red and paise twenty "i, only);t; s_El$sequert!'\erest @ L2o/o p.a from 01.10.2023 till thtr date of ,btti7{f,lLo?trn *

¶26

:ri\ ' :^'j'r "rc

¶27

(OA.N0.317l2023)

¶28

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated

¶29

movables as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the

¶30

debt due.

¶31

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶32

and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1

¶33

firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

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

¶35

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶36

of receipt of order.

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribe court on this the 3lstday , rr,#rtorrXi., corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open

¶40

sd/(G. GOP|CHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶41

';.ffu

¶42

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Spyksz Spa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S. Spyksz Spa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S Sri Durga Packaging

State Bank of India versus Smt. Gavva Vara Lakshmi

State Bank of India versus Era Educational Society

Indian Bank versus M/S. Dhandem Anandam

Bank of India versus M/S. Dlk Bio Briquette

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Venkata Sai Foods