Allowed

Yes Bank Limited v. Mandapuri Ashok

DRT20 Mar 2024OA/650/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Yes Bank Limited for recovery of Rs. 25,34,009.06 with interest against two defendants. The bank was granted permission to proceed against jointly liable defendants and a hypothecated vehicle for debt realization.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,34,009.06 with interest; permission to realize dues from defendants' properties; rights over hypothecated vehicle.

Yes Bank Limited versus Mandapuri Ashok — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 2oth DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SH. MI4ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Original Application No: 650 OF 2022

¶5

Yes Bank Limited, # 1-8-387, 3d Floor, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.P. Road, Secunderabad-50003, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Mandapuri Ashok, S/o. llaiah, Age: 33 Years, Occ: Business, H.No. 3-31/1, Kurnool Village, Zafergandhi, Warangal District-506143.

¶9

lVr. Mandapuri llaiah, S/o. Veeraiah, Age: 55 Years, Occ: Business, H.No. 3-31/1, Kurnool Village, Zafergandhi, Warangal District-506143. .....Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M.Srinivas Reddy Defendants : Exparte

¶11

::^qLLEB::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery a sum} of Rs.25,34,009.06ps from the defendants^{jointlyand severally} future interest @ 180/o^p.a. compounded with^monthlyrests from 13.06.2022 till the date^{of realization alongwlth costs and} default for sale of oA^{hypothecatea venicle.} (,/. /ft,/- 1!^., -tt1

¶13

oA.NO.550/2022

¶14

Summons^{served on D1 & 2' They were set exparteon} 09.12.2022^{as called absent and no representation'}

¶15

The^{Applicant BankexaminedD'Shyam Kumar Reddy' Asst'} Vice President,^{as AW-1 and marked 8 documentsthroughhim} as Ex. A.1to^{Ex. A'8'}

¶16

Ld. counsel^{for the Applicant Bank reportedorders maybe} passed on merits'^{Perusedthe material placed on record'}

¶17

The^{pointthat arisesfor consideration is:-}

¶18

Whether^{the Appticant Bank is entitled} for the^{claim made in the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hypothecated} vehicle?

¶19

As stated^{supra,the Defendantsremainedex-parteThe} Evidence^{Affidavit coupled withthe recitals in thedocuments} viz., Exs.^{A.1 to A 8 markedon behalfof the ApplicantBank} clinches the claim^{of the ApplicantBankagainst the Defendants'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendants are jointly and severallyliable} to^pay the^{OA claim to the Applicant Bankwith future interest} and costs.

¶20

In the^{result, the present Original AppllcationNo 650/2022is} allowed as^under:-

¶21

i) The Defendants^{are jointly and severally} llable to^pay to^{the Applicant Banka sum of} Rs.25,34,O09.O6ps^{with future interest @} 9.25o/o P.a. simple^{from the dateof} application till^{the date of} realizarrfur*

¶22

oA,NO.650/2022

¶23

¶24

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 to realise its debt;

¶25

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the^person and^properties of defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶26

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶27

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated tothe steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on thisthe 2ob Day of March,2024).

¶30

PRESIDING OFFICER

Yes Bank Limited v. Mandapuri Ashok

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Limited v. Mandapuri Ashok

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

Similar cases

Saroj Devi versus Bank of Baroda

Ms a R Marbles versus Hdfc Bank

Rakesh Kumar Upadhyay and others versus Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank)

Rajesh Anand versus Anand Rathi Global Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Ms. Ranbir Kaur

Punjab National Bank versus Rajeev