Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr.Nagam Uma Shankar

DRT26 Mar 2024OA/597/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the debtor recovery application filed by H DFC Bank Ltd. under Section 19 of the RDBA, 1993, holding the respondent liable for the principal amount, future interest, and costs, with recovery secured via hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs.22,35,008.73 plus future interest and costs; recovery via hypothecated vehicle and defendant's properties allowed.

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mr.Nagam Uma Shankar — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.L.B. (Hons.), t4.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 597 OF 2O23

¶4

H DFC Bank Ltd., office at #1-10-60/3, 3rd ftoor, Suryodaya Complex, Begumpet, Secunderabad Mandal, Hyderabad-500016 Rep by its authorized signatory

¶5

...........Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.4r. Nagam Uma Shankar, S/o. Mr. Sh iva Prasad, D. No.8-2-2691 1 and 2, Flat No.401, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Opp KBR Park Near SBI Bank, Hyderabad-500034.

¶8

Also at:

¶9

Mr. Nagam Uma Shankar, C/o. Shanker Pictures, D.No. 8-2-26911 and 2, Flat No.401, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, H yd era bad^- 5000 34.

¶10

Permanent Address: Mr. Nagam Uma Shankar, S/o. lvlr. Shiva Prasad, Flat NO. 501, 5th floor, Block No.1, My Home Avatar Narsinghi Village, Puppalaguda Village, Hydera bad - 50008. Defendant.

¶11

Cou nsel for the Applicant : Mr, N. B. Sudarshan Defendant : Exparte. lY$-

oA.No.597/2023

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA u/s.19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for the recovery of a sum of Rs.22,35,008.73ps from the defendant together with future interest @240lo p.a. from the date of filing^present application till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedu le hypothecated vehicle.

¶16

Summons sent to sole defendant returned with endorsement unclaimed hence, deemed to be served. He was set ex-parte on 03.77.2023, as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examlned Yedla Nikhila, Legal-Manager as to

¶18

AW-l and marked 8 documents through her as Ex. A.1 Ex.A.8.

¶19

Learned Counsel for the applicant bank reported orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶20

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendant and OA Schedule hypothecated vehicle?

¶22

As stated supra, defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A1 to A.8 marked on behalf of the Appllcant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the oA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest anO costs./p'',r-"1 /-v 1*'-

¶23

OA.No.s97l2023

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.597/2023 allowed as under: -

¶25

i) the defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.22,35,008.73ps with future interest @7.75o/op.a. simple from the date of application i.e.,08.06.2023 till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for recovery of its dues;

¶27

rii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant for realization of its dues; and

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 26ih day of March,2024).

¶32

srt't

¶33

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr.Nagam Uma Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr.Nagam Uma Shankar

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 Lekh Raj Sharma

Icici Bank Limited versus Manjunataha Milk Diary

Bank of Maharashtra versus Preetheesh

Canara Bank versus Sri.Paramanagouda. S. Biradar

Canara Bank versus Balasubramanyam. M.K

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Sowmya Export Garment