Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S. Dsb Enterprises

DRT11 Jan 2024OA/39/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A DeconvrT came on an Original Application filed by Indian Bank against M/s. DSB Enterprises for recovery of outstanding term loans, FITL, GECLS, and interest. The defendant was absent. The bank proved its case via witness examination and documents.

What did the court decide?

OA allowed; recovery of principal sums, interest, costs; authority to sell hypothecated movable properties and proceed against defendant's person and properties.

Indian Bank versus M/S. Dsb Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE I1TH DAY OF JANUARY'2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.39 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Indian Bank, Himayathnagar branch, Hyderabad, Telangana State Represented by its authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. DSB Enterprises, Represented by its Sole proprietor Sri D. Shankar Babu, S/o Sri Rangaiah, aged major, Male, 1-6-174 fi120, 2nd floor, Bapuji nagar, Musheerabad, Hyderabad - 500 020.

¶9

Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendant

Smt P, Revathi

Exparte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a 1,504.51 ps (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Ni undred Four and paise Fifty One only) 11 ,r,,r|l )n24^*

¶17

(oA.No.39/2023)

¶18

a) A sum of Rs.32,91,902.40ps in respect of term roan account with subsequent interest @ 15.50% p.a ;

¶19

b) A sum of Rs.2,83,355.61ps in respect of FITL account with subsequent interest @ 10.100/o p.a ;

¶20

c) A sum of Rs.3,34,267.73ps in respect of GECLS account with subsequent interest @ 10.10olo p.a ;

¶21

d) A sum of Rs.7,81,97g.76ps in respect of GECLS extension account with subsequent interest @ 10.10olo p.a from date of application till the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶22

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that the defendant availed term loan of Rs.30,97,595/; GECL extension of Rs.7,28,000/; GECLS of Rs.3,50,000/_ and FITL of Rs.4,52,085/- on 19.11.2018. The defendant availed

¶23

"Indhanvahana" facirity and executed ail security documents in favour of the Applicant Bank for securing the loan amounts. After availing the loan facilities, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 10.09.2022. Inspite

¶24

of several requests the defendant did not clear the -r^{-'. r.'i i ji-} outstanding, H his OA,? I a.- .-l ill! ? Defendant calb 3t.07.2023. ? ,d- .,. n sl) '^ti=, .at].sY W;i:.x:,{Y

¶25

(oA.No.39/2023)

¶26

Sri Nakkala Suresh, Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶27

examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which

¶28

are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.1g.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶31

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant as

¶32

prayed for?

¶33

7 ' Defendant cailed 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.Al to A. 18. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶34

B' In the resurt, the present oA is alowed with costs, as under:

¶35

(oA.No.39/2023)

¶36

b) A sum of Rs.2,83,355.61ps in respect of FITL account with subsequent interest @ 10.10o/o p.a ;

¶37

c) A sum of Rs.3,34,267.73ps in respect of GECLS account with subsequent interest @ 10.10olo p.a ;

¶38

d) A sum of Rs.7,81,978.76ps in respect of GECLS extension account with subsequent interest @ 10.10olo p.a from date of apprication till the date of realization;

¶39

The Applicant Bank is entiued to proceed against the hypothecated movable property as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶40

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

L4, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶45

.transcribed^{by her, corrected,signedand pronounced by mein theopen}

¶46

sd/(G. coPtCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER 4

Indian Bank v. M/S. Dsb Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S. Dsb Enterprises

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Narashimha Binny Rice Mill

Bank of India versus M/S. Prius Enterprises Private Limited

M/s Sls Power Corporation ltd., versus M/s. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Paturi Muralikrishna

Ms Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (Rarc) versus M/S. Aswarth Usha

State Bank of India, versus M/S. Disha Systems India Private Limited