Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Vaishnavi Constructions

DRT21 Feb 2025OA/105/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This adjudgment allowed an original application filed by a bank for recovery of dues. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed amount with interest, approved lien on hypothecated assets, and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay Rs.66,57,641.28 with interest, approve sale of hypothecated assets, and issue recovery certificate.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Vaishnavi Constructions — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TR]BUNAL.II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 21SI DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIG]NAL APPLICATIoN No: 105 oF 2024

¶4

Kotak Mah indra Bank Ltd., Having its branch office at 6-3- 1 1.09 I 7/ P / 302, 3'd Ftoor. Jewel Pavani Towers, Rajbhavan Road, >omajt9uda, Hyderabad _ 500082. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.... .Applica nt.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s.Vaishnavi Constructions., RgP by its Prop. Madhusudhan Reddy, Omce at 8-2-248 /A/5/25, Venkateshwara Hills, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500034.

¶8

M/s.MRK Bricks., Rep by its Managing partner Madhusudhan Reddy, Office at

¶9

8.-2-.248/Al5/25, Tata Capitat Ground Ftoor, Venkateshwara Hills, Banjara Hi[s, Hyderabad - 5OOO34.

¶10

Mr. Madhusudhan Reddy, S/o. Raghupathi Reddy, Aged about 53^years. Occ: Business, R/o.Villa No.209, Ashot Ala Mansion. Dhulapa y, Medchat Matkajgiri-500014.

¶11

Mrs. Malathi, S/o.Madhusudhan Reddy, Aged about 43^years, Occ: House wlie, R/o.Villa No.209, Ashot Ala Mansion, Dhulapally, Medchat Ma tkajg iri- 500014.

vlft3ffnaun"

oA.NO.10s/2024

Counsel^{for the APPlicant}

Defendants

M/s.M.Srinivas^ReddY

Ex-parte

:: ORDER^::

T. The Applicant^{Bank filed the presentOA for the recovery a total} sum of^Rs.66,57 ,64l.2Aps^{from the defendantsjointlyand} severally^{with futureinterest@18Vo p afrom the date of} application^{till the date of realization alonq with costs and in} default^{for sale of hypothecated asset'}

¶21

summons served^{on D1 to 4' They were set ex-parte on} 07.08.2024^{as called absent and no representation'}

¶22

The Applicant^{Bank examinedP S Abhishek' Legal Manager'as} AW-1 and^{marked08 documentsthroughhim as Ex' A'1 to Ex'} A.08.

¶23

Bank reported^{ordersmay be}

¶24

Ld. Counsel^{for the APP|icant} the material Placed^{on record'}

¶25

passed through^{merits. Perused}

¶26

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

¶27

Whether the^{AppticantBank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hYpothecated} asset?

¶28

As stated supra,^{the Defendants remained ex-parte The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1 to^{A.08 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} Hence, I hold^{that the Defendantsare jointlyarld severglly liable} ' d%'"

¶29

¶30

oA.NO.tos/2024

¶31

to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶32

In the result, the present Original Application No.105/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶33

i) The Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.66,57,641.28ps with future interest @9.93olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶34

ii) the OA claim is secured by way oF hypothecation of asset described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entiUed to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶35

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

¶36

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶37

a The Appricant Bank is directed to fire cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 21't Day of February, 2025).

¶40

'7Y1rv" '.,.'1.1 "_rv!--

¶41

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Vaishnavi Constructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S Vaishnavi Constructions

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

Union Bank of India versus Mandulla Yadagiri Prasad

V Satya Prasad Akula and Others versus Iifl Home Finance Ltd.

R%20RAMANJINAMMA versus Tadipatri Coop Town Bank Ltd.

Uco Bank versus Smt.Mauram Rajitha

The Axis Bank Limited versus Tasleem Enterprises

The Axis Bank Limited versus Shree Arihant Corporation