Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Avr Associates

DRT20 Aug 2024OA/699/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by a bank for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 31.32 crore along with interest and costs against eleven borrowers and guarantors, holding the defendants liable based on unchallenged evidence.

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs. 31,32,83,421.58 plus interest at 11% p.a. simple, costs, and rights to proceed against mortgage properties and assets.

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Avr Associates — DRT (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 2OTH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAI4ESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDlNG OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 699 OF 2022

¶4

City Union Bank Ltd. Kadapa Branch YSR Kadapa District Rep. by its Branch Manager.

¶5

....Applicant,

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. AV R Assoclates Rep by its Proprietor A. Ven kateswarlu D. No. 19/233, 2nd Floor Madras Road, Kadapa.

¶8

Mt. A. Venkateswarlu S/o Mr. A. Chinna Venkanna lYajor, D. No. 7-213/7 NGO Colony, Kadapa-516001.

¶9

Mrs. A. Veerakumari Wo^{Mr. A. Venkateswarlu} Major, D. No. 7-273/7 NGO Colony, Kada pa-516001.

¶10

Mt. M. Balaji Rao S/o Mr. Venkoji Rao, lvlajor, D. No. 7/519, NGO Colony, Kadapa-516001.

¶11

Mr. G. Venkoji Rao S/o lvlr. Peeraiah, l.4ajor Maruthi Nagar, Kadapa.

/Y'*^

oa.699l2O2Z

Mr. M. Krishnaji Rao S/o S/o Mr. Venkoji Rao, Major, D. No.7/520, NGO Colony, Kadapa-516001.

¶16

Mt. A. Raj Kiran S/o Mr. A. Venkateswarlu Major, D. No. 7-273-7 NGO Colony, Kadapa-516001.

¶17

Mr. T. S. Phanindra Babu S/o Srinivasulu, Major 6/ L4tZ-5, Sankarapuram Kadapa.

¶18

M/s. The Cuddapah DistrictWeaker Section Sarvodaya Sangam, Rep. by its President lvlr. A. Venkateswarlu, D. No. 7-213-7, NGO Colony Kadapa-516001.

¶19

M/s. AV R Educational^Trust Rep by its Chairman Mr. A. Venkateswarlu, D. No. 7-213-7, NGO Colony Kadapa-516001.

¶20

Mr. A. Lakshmi Vivekananda S/o lvl r. A. Venkateswarlu Major, D. No. 7-2f3-7 ... Defendants

¶21

NGO Colony, Kadapa-516001.

¶22

Counsel for Applicant Ms. Ch. Laxmi Chaya. Counsel for Defendants 1,2,3,9&10 No representation. Counsel for defendants,4 5 & 6 No representation. Counsel for defendants 7, 8 &¹¹ No representation.

fusx

oa.699/2022

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a total sum of Rs.31,32,83,421.58ps from the defendants along with interest @15olo p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedule properties.

¶28

The averments of applicant bank as per the OA, briefly, are that 1st defendant is a proprietary concern. 2nd defendant is its sole proprietor, President-cum-Correspondent of 9th defendant Society and Chairman of loth defendant. The 3'd defendant is the wife of 2nd defendant and co-borrower to the loans availed by 1't and 2nd defendants. Defendants 2 to 8 are the guarantors to the loan facilities availed by 9th defendant and defendants 2, 3,7 and 11 are guarantors to the loan availed by 1Oth defendant. Defendants 2 and 3 are the co-borrowers to the loan availed by 11th defendant. Defendants executed requisite loan docu ments/g ua ra ntee agreements as per requirement. The loans are secured by OA B-schedule properties. Therefore, common claim is filed against the secured assets. The borrowers 7,2,3,9, 10 and 11 committed defaults in repayment. Hence this petition. Securitisation proceedings are pending.

¶29

Defendants 7,2,3,9 & 10, 4 to 6 and 7,,8 & 11 entered appearance through their counsel viz., T. vijay Kumar, Mukesh Sharma and A. Vijay Kumar respectively. However, they did not choose to file written statement. Hence their right of filing written statement forfeited vide docket order dated 20.70.2023. ttrtt"lZ '' ./f^{.!b - .}

¶30

oA.69912022

¶31

¶32

Applicant Bank examined S.V.V.N.D. Vinod, Branch^{Manager as} AW-1 and marked 124 documents through him as^{Ex. A.1 to} Ex. 4.724.

¶33

Defendants' right of adducing^{evidence has been forfeited for} non-representation vide docket order dated 03.07.2024.

¶34

Both counsels^prayed that orders may be^passed on^merits. Perused the material^placed on record.

¶35

The^point that arises for consideration^is:-

¶36

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants 1to 11 and against OA schedule assets?

¶37

According to the applicant bank, defendants failed to repay the loan as per the agreed terms. Defendants being the borrowers/ guarantors/mortgagers as the case may be, failed to pursue the case. Therefore, the claim of the applicant bank is amply^proved vide Exs. A.1 to A.124 and the recitals therein. Under such circumstances, the Evidence Affidavit of AW.1 coupied with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to 4.124 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank, remains unchallenged and unrebutted. Hence, I hold that Defendants 1to 11, to the extent of their respective loan, are liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶38

In the result, the^present Original Application No. 699/2022 is allowed as under:ffit"yt""

¶39

oA.69912022

¶40

¶41

i) The Defendants 1 to 11 are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.31,32,83,421.58ps, subject to liability under respective loan account, along with interest @11olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶42

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of schedule-B property and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for realization of the debt;

¶43

iii) the applicant banks also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realisation of its dues; and

¶44

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶45

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

¶46

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload on Web Portal.

¶48

(Dic'tatetl to the steno, signecl ond pronortncecl by me in the open courl on this the 20't' clal' of Augt,st' 2 02 1)'

¶49

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Avr Associates

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Avr Associates

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

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Gian Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Ezhumalai

Ms Rav Smittens Opc Private Limited versus Canara Bank

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Alpine Foods

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S Shri Durga Cycle Stores

Canara Bank versus M/S Maa Kamakhya Print Pack