Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Ambothu Laxman

DRT29 Aug 2024OA/933/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery, the Tribunal, finding defendants absent, held the bank entitled to sue for recovery of dues supported by documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay sum of Rs.33,95,230.02 with interest @ 10.25% p.a. simple; Bank directed to file cost memorandum and issue recovery certificate.

What the court decided

Icici Bank Limited versus Ambothu Laxman — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE^{DEBTSRECOVERY TRIBUNAL-Ii AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED^{THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST'2024}

¶3

PRESENT:^{SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB'(HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶4

Original Application^{No: 933 OF 2023}

¶5

ICICI BANK^LIN4ITED ICICI Towers, SerilingamPallY^Mandal, Ranga Reddy^Distrlct Rep. by its^{Authorized Signatory}

¶6

...Applica^nt

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ambothu^Laxman,

¶9

S/o.A. Khasana, Age 52 Years,^{Occ: Self Employee,}

¶10

H.No.2-124,^Yacharam,

¶11

Near Water^{Tank,ThakkalaPallY,} Ranga Reddy^District -^{501509, T'S'}

¶12

Ramavath^Kisan, S/o.Hanumanth^Ramavath,

¶13

Age 40 Years,^{Occ: SelfEmPloyee,}

¶14

H.No.3-1223/7,^Yacharam,

¶15

Near Water^{Tank,ThakkalaPallY,} Ranga Reddy^District -^{501509, T'S}

¶16

......Defendants

¶17

Counsel for^the APplicant^{: M/sG'Adrian Kiran Raj}

¶18

: Ex-Parte

¶19

Defendants

¶20

::^qLLLB-::

¶21

The Applicant^{Bankfiled the present OA for the recovery of a sum of} Rs.33,95,230. O2ps^{as on 18.10.2023from the defendants jointly} fun"u

¶22

OA.No.933/2023

¶23

and severally with future interest @ 24o/o p.a. with monthly rests from 11.09.2023 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶24

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were

¶25

set ex-parte on 24.06.2024 as called absent and no representauon.

¶26

The Applicant Bank examined N.Chandrasekar, Regionat

¶27

Relationship tvlanager as AW_1 and marked 14 documents through

¶28

him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.14.

¶29

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated orders may be passed on

¶30

merits and perused the material placed on record.

¶31

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶32

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants?

¶33

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence AFfidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶34

In the result, the present Original Application No.933/2023 is allowed as under: -

¶35

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.33,95,230.02ps with future interest @ 10.25olo p.a. simple, from the date of application titt the date of reatization; OWr",r,

¶36

oA.No.933/2023

¶37

to Proceed^against

¶38

ii) the^{applicantbank is also entitled} the^defendantfor the Person^{and ProPertiesof} realization^{of its dues;}

¶39

iii)^{the applicant bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶40

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

¶41

Issue^{Recovery Certificateaccordingly'}

¶42

10.^{communicate-?.opv o[.tni; oJ!ef-o^:T} l;"TrTfillSll'il;'^{mein the} [i.,.,"a^{to the steno'' transcribed by him' correcteo'} Lp"n .o,tt^{on *ls the 29th day of August' 2024)'}

¶43

/fuo<"t (RA\q.ESHWAR KOTHE) pnestotnc oFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Ambothu Laxman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Icici Bank Limited v. Ambothu Laxman

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Appsdaily Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajeev Prabhakar Nagwekar

Icici Bank Limited versus Mihir

Central Bank of India versus M/S G-3 Technologies Private Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Kisan Rice Mill

Hdfc Bank versus Ajay Dhingra