Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. S. Ajay Kumar

DRT8 Mar 2024OA/77/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT-II at Hyderabad allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 32,60,522.53 plus interest and costs against defaulting borrowers. The defendants remained in absentia, and the court acted on the evidence affidavit and exhibited documents to hold them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Directing payment of Rs. 32,60,522.53 with future interest, permitting realization against hypothecated vehicle and defendants' properties, and fixing recovery certificate.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. S. Ajay Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.Com., L.LB.^(Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Original Application No: 77 OF 2022

¶5

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., #6-3-7709/tlPl3O2, 3d Floor, Jewel Pavani Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Appllcant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. S Ajay Kumar, S/o. Ummaiah Age: 26 Years. Occ: Service, H.No. 1-10-1 A1, Kalanagar, Metpalli, Karimnagar-505325.

¶9

Mrs. S. Laxmi, Wo. Chinna Narsaiah, Age: 50 Years, Occ: Self Employed, H.No. 1-10-1 A1, Kalanagar, Metpalli, Karimnagar-505325.

¶10

Rajeshuni Bhumanna, S/o. Rajanna, Age: 45 Years, Occ: Service, H.No. 2-41, Timmapur, .....Defendants

¶11

Ibrahimpatnam, Karimnagar-505450.

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M.Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Exparte

:: qLLEB::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a sum of Rs.32,60,522.53ps from the defendants^jointly and severally tM\

¶17

oA.NO.17 12022

¶18

future interest @ 18o/o^p.a. frcm L5.!2.2O21. till the^{date of} realization along with costs and default for sale of OA hypothecated vehicle.

¶19

Summons sent to D1 to D3. They were set exparte^on 26,08-2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Abhishek^{P.S., LegalAssociate,} as AW-1 and marked 7 documents through^{him as Ex. A.1 to} Ex. A.7.

¶21

Ld. counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders^maybe passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶22

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

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

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.7 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.

¶25

In the result, the^present Original Application No.77 /2022 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of t%*

¶27

oa.No.77l2O22

¶28

Rs.32,60,522.53ps with future interest @ 9.25o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

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 entiued to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶30

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

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, sjgned and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 8b D.y of March, 2024) .

¶35

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. S. Ajay Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. S. Ajay Kumar

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

Ms Success Group versus Idbi Bank

Canara Bank versus M/S Shree Sai Aluminium

Canara Bank versus M/S Shree Sai Enterprises

Prince Builders Th Its Prop Jethanand Khemchand Khandwani versus Gandhibagh Sahakari Bank Ltd. Nagpur

Canara Bank versus Sri. Subhash

Canara Bank versus Mr. Prabhakar Venkappa Naik