Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sherton Bakers and Sweets (Borrower)

DRT28 Aug 2024OA/386/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of outstanding term and GECL loans along with interest. The beneficiaries must jointly and severally pay the principal and interest sum and face sale of hypothecated movables.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 44,42,265.96 with interest; bank entitled to sell hypothecated movables and proceed against defendants' properties.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sherton Bakers and Sweets (Borrower) — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.386 of 2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

Canara Bank, I.S. Sadan Branch, Hyderabad. Telanagana State Represented by its Sr. Branch Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Sherton Bakers & Sweets ( Borrower), represented by Mrs. Khursheed Begum W/o Syed Ahmed, Aged 40 years, occ: business, R/o H. No. 17-3-2/20, Yakutpura,

¶10

Hyderabad - 500 023.

¶11

MrsKhursheed Begum, W/o Syed Ahmed (Prop./ guarantor) Aged 40 years, occ: business, R/o H.no. L7-3-2/20, Yakutpura, Hyderabad - 500 023. Defendants

¶12

Cou nse I for the
For the Applican F-q"a; Shaik Faheemullah
For the Defenda i- -E "d * Mir Masood Ali Khan
* n n rlrn 1nl
: 2oAUc'nlr f,
Ro,"$-9
&d;HI9

¶13

(oA. No.386/2022)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.44,42,265.96ps (Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Forty Two thousand Two hundred and Sixty five paise Ninety Six only) i.e., a sum of Rs.35,08,891.62ps in term loan account with interest @ 9.25o/o p.a and a sum oF Rs.9,33,374.34ps in GECL loan account with interest @ 8.90% p.a with monthly rests from 01.12.2022 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶16

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 and term loan limit of Rs.62.75 lakhs dated 01.08.2018. The defendants executed letter of undertaking, guarantee agreement, composite hypothecation agreement etc. The defendants executed Agreement cum deed of composite hypothecation by hypothecating the entire stock 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 classi NPA on 29.12.2022 and issued legal n oti spite of several req uests 6J;& o$.i.h.,,,,,r*:s.l@l*#7

¶17

(oA.No.386/2022 )

¶18

and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence

¶19

this OA.

¶20

Ld counsel for defendants filed vakalath but failed to file WS. Hence the right of filing Written statement was forfeited on 07.03.2024.

¶21

SmtDimpi Ray, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself AS AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked AS Ex.A.1 to A.24.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

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?

¶24

Defendants counsel filed vakalth but not filed Written statement. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.24. 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 entifled to recover the

¶25

claim made in the OA and costs.
*
drS
B. In the result, the is allowed costs, as u nder:
OAI AU0
'02{

¶26

(oA. No.386/2022)

¶27

The Defendants are joinily and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.44,42,265.96ps (Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Forty Two thousand Two hundred and Sixty five paise Ninety Six only) i.e., a sum of Rs.35,08,891.62ps in term loan account with interest @ 9.25o/o p.a and a sum of Rs.9,33,374.34ps in GECL loan account with interest @ 8.90% p.a from 01 .12.2022 till the date of realization;

¶28

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as described in schedule to OA towa rds realization of the debt due.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

L4, Communicate a copy of the 6rder to the parties concerned.

¶34

(Dictated bcd by her, correctcd, signed and pronounccd by mc in the open
court , 2024)
//" -
tv&9 sd/-
(G. GOPTCHAND)
r*: 2BAUCmt !r. PRESIDING OFFICER
/TRUE co?q,
'1rd. _! (,C.9,t9V6
S*,""r:S), +o7rffiflif"i"a'
..s;ffi.rry

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sherton Bakers and Sweets (Borrower)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sherton Bakers and Sweets (Borrower)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus Smt Banoth Sarojini

O. Pruthvik Rao versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Sri Kunarapu Raju

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Reddygari Raghunandan Reddy

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Poonam Agro Engg Works

Akula Ravinder versus City Union Bank Limited