Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Best Windows Systems

DRT29 Apr 2024OA/692/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Canara Bank's original application for recovery of RS.30.86 million term loan and overdraft dues from M/s. Best Windows Systems and a co-defendant, ruling them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pay RS.30,86,496.75 with future interest, costs, and bank authorized to recover from hypothecated assets and defendant properties.

Canara Bank versus M/S Best Windows Systems — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS^{THE 29th DAYOFAPRIL, 2024}

¶3

PRESENT: SH.^{MMESHWARKOTHE, B.Com, L L'B (Hons ), M A'} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{NO. 692 OF 2023}

¶5

canara Bank. M.R. Palli Branch, Applicant. Tirupathi District.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Best^{Windows Systems} Represented^{bY its ProPrietor} D.No.389, ShoP^{No.1, Avila} Bangalore High^WaY,Near AP03 Drive in^Restaurant, Tirupathi - 517501, Andhra Pradesh.

¶8

!lr. Sudheera D/o. Sri Venkata^SubbaRao Aged: Major, Occ:^Business Flat No.106, S.R.Homes^APartment Sri Krishna Avenue,^{Haranathapuram,} Nellore, Andhra^Pradesh.

¶9

.......Defendants,

¶10

counsel for the Applicant^{: Mr.T'Nagender} Defendants : Exparte'

¶11

O3DEB

¶12

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present oA for the recovery of a} total sum of Rs.30,86,496.75ps^{i.e., (Rs'20,09,692.75psunder} Term Loan facility^{with interest} @13.20yo^p'a'and Rs.10.76,804/- under^{Overdraft Loan facility with interest} @12.80o/o^p.a.) iointly^{and severallyfrom the dqfendants 1 and} /Y-'"

¶13

oA.69212023

¶14

2 with monthly rests from 01.O7.2023 till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedule Hypothecated assets.

¶15

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set ex-parte on 25.07.2024, as called absent and no representation.

¶16

The Applicant Bank examined Kotapuri Naveen, Manager as AW-1 and marked 11 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex.A11.

¶17

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

¶18

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶19

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA Schedule Hypothecated assets?

¶20

As stated supra, defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A1 to A.11 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶21

In the result, the present Original Application No.692l2023 is allowed as under: -

¶22

i) the defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Y'"*

oa.69212O23

Rs.30,86,496.75ps with future Interest @8.10olo^{p.a. simple from the dateof} ( Qa'ro{ application till the date of realization; ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same for realization of its dues;

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

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. (Diclated to the steno, signed and^pronounced by me in the open court on thls the 29"' day ofApril, 2024).

¶32

Ku MESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. M/S Best Windows Systems

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Best Windows Systems

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

Anis Anvarbhai Ghanchivahora versus State Bank of India

Bank of India versus Mansi Manilala Rangani

Bank of Baroda versus Krishna Oil Industries

Deepak Prakashbhai Ramchandani Ors. versus Icici Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Aishwarya Food Company

Canara Bank versus M/S Riddhi Jewellers