Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Ms Hari Cotton Ginning Pressing Factory

DRT22 Apr 2024OA/787/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In ex-parte proceedings, the DRT-II at Hyderabad allowed an Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank against five cotton traders under Section 19 RDB Act 1993. The court held the dealers liable to pay the claimed dues of Rs. 6.49 crore with future interest and costs based on the evidence affidavit and documents placed on record.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.6,49,02,238.81 with future interest @7.80% p.a.; OA claim secured by hypothecation/mortgage of properties; bank entitled to proceed against properties for recovery; costs a

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Ms Hari Cotton Ginning… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 22Nd DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RATYESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.L.B. (Hons.), N4.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 787 OF 2023

¶4

¶5

Kot Bra Hyd Rep	ak Mahindra Bank Limited, nchatSomajiguda, era bad-500082, by its authorized representative Versus
.i 1.	M/s.HariCotton GinnigPressing Factory OfficeatS.No.82-A2,B3-A, BasapuramRoad,Adoni, KurnoolDist. AndhraPradesh-S18301,rep byits Proprietor Mr.Haridas YadavGolla
2.	M/s.HariCottonTraders, D.No.16/68C,BasapuramRoad, Adoni, KurnoolDist, AndhraPradesh-518301, RepbyitsProprietor Mr.Haridas YadavGolla
3.	M/s. SriHari TradersTMCYard, GodownNo.19, Adoni, KurnoolDist, AndhraPradesh-S18301,repby its Mr.Haridas YadavGolla.
4.	M/s.HuchirappaCottonTraders D.No.17/7/L2,AlurRoad, Adoni, KurnoolDist, Andhra Pradesh-518301, repby its ProprietorMrs. Golla ShantiYadav
5.	M/s.Naresh Enterprises D.No.l7/7 /1212,AlurRoad, Adoni, Kurnool Dt, AndhraPradesh 518301, repbyits Mr,G. NareshKumarYadav /ry.''t

.......Applicant.

oA.NO.787l2023

M/s. sa^{ha rsh} gotton^rraders, c9"., u-fotlr'h.r-lat^y: -?i'1.,', j["3:$l^e.a ^m* D'.No.t7l7t2/2,^{Alur Road,} itou'(?^ur f^t '

¶10

Adoni, Kurnool^{Dt, Andlil Pradesh 6; 5!s ; c'(} , rrd rrdutr>rr J};;';,-;'t;5"';:l]1t9;1t"'

¶11

518301,^{Rep bv} its Mr. G. Naveen^{Kumar Yadav,} 4. M,. €rl s\a,r.r\ rurnov yaaav

¶12

Mr. Haridas^{Yadav Golla,516mr' IHo''aao.Ya.dav'.c3'J} "*{-,, s/o. Go,a Lakshmanna,'')l:3.,;jr;31'1fl,:P3iH';;il^11 "- ''

¶13

aged about⁵⁸ Years, "is-lJit

¶14

ffi[?,:?:ij:, D' N o' 1 5^{- 1} 7'' o', u. ;; i,.iiil.j ;;fi lr"I ".\ a^{uo,r1 rz y..} nnon.u'prad'esh-S¹⁸³⁰ 1. ;; sy;},:ir, ; ;; ; _3:i;,i"d,iia,l,, 1..,1r''a. P,ortc;f - 5te^ao) (].,)

¶15

Counsel for^{the Applicant: Ms' D' Bala} Derendants : Ex-parte.^(p .%lT:l*.Tdi:*^ fry*"

¶16

oRpER /_-9/ o{.ot

¶17

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA u/s'19 of the Recovery} of Debts and^{BankruptcyAct, 1993for the recovery of a total} sum of Rs.6,4g,O2,238.81ps^{from the defendantstogether with} interest @t2.25o/o^{p.a. for the OD loan account and 10'30o/o} p.a. with monthly rests^{from 20.09'2023 till the date of} realisation along^{with costs and sale of OA schedule assets'}

¶18

Summons served^{on D1 to 10' They were set ex-pafte on} 15.12.2023, as^{called absentand no representation'}

¶19

The Applicant^Bank examined Srinivas^{Ponduri,Assistant Vice} President as AW-1 and marked^{11 documentsthrough him as} Ex. A.1 to Ex.A.11.

¶20

Learned Counsel for^{the applicant bank} reported orders^{maY be} passed on merits. Perused^{the material} placed on record. $f'^''r..

¶21

o A.NO,7A7 /2023

¶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 Schedule assets?

¶24

As stated supra, defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit 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 liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No.78712023 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) the defendants are liable to pay to the sum of

¶27

Applicant Bank a Rs.6,49,02,238.81ps with future interest @7.80o/o^p.a. simple from the date of application i.e.,25.09.2023 till the date of realization;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypoth ecatio n/ mortgag e of properties described in the schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same for recovery of its dues;

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled fqr the costs. /1Y..*.\ ,/ - a)-

¶31

oA.NO.787l2023 '

¶32

¶33

The Applicant Bank^{is directed to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of^{receipt of this Order'}

¶34

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶35

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} tOi*,"a^{to the steno, signedand pronouncedby me in the open court on this the} 22"d day of April,^2024).

¶36

OW**t lnhr(esHweR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Ms Hari Cotton Ginning Pressing Factory

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Ms Hari Cotton Ginning Pressing Factory

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

Canara Bank versus Sri. G Vishnumurthy

Canara Bank versus Mr. Shivanagouda Laxmanagouda Patil

Jayshreeben Nareshbhai Intwala versus Surat National Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus Rahul Vinay

Bank of India versus Navraj Singh

Bank of India versus Smt Manjit Kaur