Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Amrutha Feeds Mixing Plant

DRT19 Dec 2024OA/402/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank against a proprietorship firm and its proprietor-guarantors for recovery of outstanding loans totaling Rs. 37,40,913.93 with future interest and costs, and ordered issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Total sum of Rs.37,40,913.93 with future interest to be paid by Defendants jointly and severally; Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged/hypothecated properties; Recovery certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Amrutha Feeds Mixing Plant — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER' 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.4O2 OF ZO22

¶4

Between:

¶5

Canara Bank, Basheerbagh branch, D. No, 3-6-69 / 4/1A, Avanthi Nagar, Opp Skylark Apartments, Basheerbagh, Hydera bad, Telangana - 500 029. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Amrutha Feeds Mixing plant, O/o plot no.L-6l5, sy.No.5BB to 630, Cross road no.2, GI^p, Jadcherla Polepally SEZ, Rajapur village, Mahabubnagardist - S0g 202. Rep by its Proprietor SmtNenavathManga mma

¶9

SmtNenavathMangamma, w/o V. Ramulu, aged major, female, occ: business, flat no.4, plot no.13B, Boduppal, Hyderabad, TS - 500 039,

¶10

Mr. V. Ramulu, s/o V. Lachaya, aged major,

¶11

{ g 0Eti ffil

¶12

male, occ: business, R/o flat no.4 plot no.138, Boduppal, Hyderabad, TS - 500 039.

¶13

Counsel for the Parties:

¶14

For the Applicant

¶15

For the Defendants

¶16

Sri K. Bhaskar Redy Exparte

¶17

(OA.No.ao2/2022)

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.37,40,913,93ps (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Forty Thousand Nine hundred Thirteen and paase Ninety three only) i.e.,

¶20

a) A sum of Rs.25,64,7881- in respect of loan A/c. No.0878261555607 with current and future interest @ 11.50o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶21

b) A sum of Rs.6,13,435.69ps in respect of loan^A/c. No.0878753000018 with current and future interest @ 9.80%^p.a with monthly rests from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶22

c) A sum of Rs.5,62,690.24ps in respect of loan^Alc. No.0878755000005 with current and future interest @^10.40olo p.a with monthly rests from date of OA till the date of realization; and in default for sale of mortgaged^property and^hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶23

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant^Bankstates that defendant No.1 is^{proprietorship} firm represented^{by its} proprietor / defendant no.2 and'defendant no.3 stood as^guarantor ava il lakhs on hypothecation of stocks and book in the schedule to OA. Defendant^no.3

¶24

exectrted EugranteBlfgree'thent dated^{20.06.2016 and also executed}

¶25

(oA. No.402l2022 )

¶26

agreement for creation of second charge over schedule A property. Subsequently the defendants availed WCDL loan of Rs.8,75,000/- on 73.04.2020 and once again availed Rs.5.00 lakhs under GECL facility. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was^{constrained to} classify the account as NPA on 30.04.2022 and issued legal^notice dated 28.09.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands,^the defendants did not clear the outstanding.^{Hence this OA.}

¶27

Defendants called absent and set^exparte'

¶28

Ms. M. Kiranmai, Manager^{of the Applicant Bank examined herself as} AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents,^{which are markedas} Ex.A.1 to A.33.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank'}

¶30

The^point that arise^{for consideration is whetherthe ApplicantBank is} entitled for the claim made in the^{OA against the Defendantsas} prayed for?

¶31

Defendants remained exparte.^{To substantiatethe case of the} Appli k, AW.1, official of the^{Applicant Bank was examined} evant documents as Ex.Al to A.33.^{In view of} the Applicant Bank^{has established their claim} the Defendants and hence^{the ApplicantBank}

¶32

(oA. No.a02l2022)

¶33

is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶34

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.37,40,913.93ps (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Forty Thousand Nine hundred Thirteen and paise

¶35

Ninety three only) i.e.,

¶36

a) A sum of Rs.25,64,788/- in respect of loan A/c. No.0878261555607 with current and future interest @ 11.50o/o p.a from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶37

b) A sum of Rs.6,13,435.69ps in respect of loan A/c. No.0878753000018 with current and future interest @ 9.80% p.a from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶38

c) A sum of Rs.5,62,690.24ps in respect of loan^A/c. No.0878755000005 with current and future interest @ t0.40o/o p.a from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶39

The Applicant bank is entitled to^{proceedagainst the mortgagedand} hypothecatedproperties as described in schedule to^{OA towards} realization of the debt due.

¶40

The entitled to^proceed against the^person and No.2& 3 and^properties of defenda nt no. the debt due. t&,9.08QJS[utio[

¶41

il,''iat ,. "-' L\ .$.{ 4

¶42

#-ry

¶43

(OA.No.4o2/2022)

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and^pronounced by me in the open^courton this the 19!h day of Oec,2024)

¶49

sdl_ (G. GOPICHAND)

¶50

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶51

6sB
,4P 4$ '9.
i lsoEcml
'-,,s1 '
'''.t.{, .-Q:-Y./
*Q;m.nP

¶52

Y7*# asft.nlsh'qL^

Canara Bank v. M/S. Amrutha Feeds Mixing Plant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Amrutha Feeds Mixing Plant

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bank of Baroda versus Sri. Boddam Praveen Yadav

Mr S Prathap versus Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.

City Union Bank Limited versus Avanthi Agro Agencies

Govardhan Chawan versus Uco Bank

Canara Bank versus M/S. Nieva Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Sangam Srilaxmi