Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sk Industries

DRT25 Mar 2024OA/913/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues from SK Industries and Bathula Srikanth. Being an ex-parte matter where defendants were absent, the Tribunal held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed sum with future interest and costs based on the bank's evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 22,46,910/- with future interest; bank entitled to realize debt against mortgaged assets; bank entitled to costs.

Union Bank of India versus Sk Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS THE 25th DAY^{OF MARCH,2024}

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 913^{OF 2023}

¶4

Union Bank of India, chikkadpally Branch, # 1-8-54 to 1-8-54A, Adj to Pista House, chikkadpally Main Road, Hyderabad, Telangana-500020.

¶5

... '.Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

SK Industries, Rep. by its Proprietor

¶8

Mr. Bathula Srlkanth, H.No.10-12/2, Vlnayaka Nagar, Balanagar, Hyderabad, Telangana-500042.

¶9

And also at: # 6-10-618, Near ESI Dispensary, Vinayaka Nagar, Balanagar, Medchal-Malkajgiri District-500042.

¶10

Bathula Srikanth, s/o. Late Kailashpathi, Age: 45 Yea6, Occ: Business, Male, H.No. 10-12/2, Vinayaka Nagar, Balanagar, Hyderabad, Telangana-500042

¶11

....Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Ms.Tarangini Plsipathi Defendants : Exparteruf'

¶13

oA,NO,913/2023

¶14

:: qLLqB::

¶15

The Applicant^{Bank filedthe presentOA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.22,46,910/-^{i.e. (Rs.7,97,049/-, Rs 12,19,614/-and} Rs.2,3O,247 /^{-) from the defendantsjointly and severallyfuture} interest @^14.300/o, @^{12.55o/oand@ 9.50o/o respectivelyp a'} from the date^{of OAapplicationtill the dateof realization along} with costs and^{default for sale of OA schedule assets'}

¶16

Summons served^{to D1 & 2 returned with endorsement} unclaimed hence,^{deemed to be served' They were set exparte} on 25.01.2023^{as calledabsent and no representation'}

¶17

The Applicant^{Bank examined A.Lokesh, chief Manager, as AW-} 1 and marked 26^{documents throughher as Ex A lto Ex'} A.26.

¶18

Heard the^{Ld. counselfor the Applicant Bank and perused the} material Placed^{on record.}

¶19

The^point that arises^{for considerationis:-}

¶20

Whether the^{ApplicantBankis entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA schedule} assets?

¶21

As stated supra,^{the Defendantsremainedex-parte The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupled with the recitals in thedocuments} viz., Exs. A.1 to^{4.26marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the ApplicantBankagainst the Defendants'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendantsare jointly and severally liable} to^pay the^{OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest} and costs. OSttt^'

¶22

oA.NO.913/2023

¶23

In the result, the^{present Original ApplicationNo 913/2023is} allowed as under:^-

¶24

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Ri.22,46,9LO/- i.e. (Rs.7,97,0491-, Rs.t2,Lg,674/- and^{Rs.2,3O,247l-)with} future interest @ 10.50o/o^{p.a' simple from} the date of application till^{the dateof} realization;

¶25

ii) the oA claim is^{secured bY way of} mortgage/hypothecation^{of assetsdescribed} in the schedules^{annexed to the OA and the} applicant bank is^{entitledto proceed against} the same to realise^{its debt;}

¶26

iii) the applicant^{bank is also entitledto proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendants for^{realization of its dues; and}

¶27

iv) the applicant bank^{is entitled for the costs'}

¶28

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

¶29

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶30

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno, signed and^{pronouncedbyme in theopencourtonthisthe} 25n Day ofMarch,^2024).

¶31

!t,tt,t

¶32

PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Sk Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sk Industries

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

Kailash Chandra Jena versus Uco Bank

Ms Influx Security Services Pvt. Ltd. And Others versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Raminder Singh

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sree Brundavan Family Restaurant and Benquet Hall

State Bank of India versus Lekh Raj Sharma

Icici Bank Limited versus Manjunataha Milk Diary