Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. M/S Moghuls Paradiez.

DRT28 Feb 2025OA/119/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 20,53,950.52 with future interest from the defendant firms and individuals, holding them liable as the OA was ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 20.53 Lakhs with interest; OA claim secured by hypothecated assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus M/S Moghuls Paradiez. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT: SH, RAMESHWAR.KoTHE, B,com., L.LB. (Hons. ), Iv].A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 119 OF 2024

¶3

HDFC BanK Ltd., Legal Department, 3.d Floor, Suryodaya Complex, Opp Shoppers Stop, begumpet, Hyderabad _ 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶4

,....Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

f4ls. Moghuls parad iez., Represented by its partner Ivlr.Ramraj, 7^_ 1^_397 / 720/ c2, :^{R Nagar, Opp SR Nagar Community} Ha , Hydera bad - 500038.

¶7

M r. S. Madhu Sudhana Rao, Partner of M/s. Moghuls paradiez., 7 -7-397 /L20/cZ, S R Nagar, Opp SR Nagar Community Hall, Hydera bad - 500038.

¶8

N.lrs. Naga^prasuna Gajjala, W/o.Mr.Madhu Sud hana Rao, Partner of lvl/s. Moghuts paradiez., l-39/720/c2, SR Nagar Community Ha , SR Nagar, Hyderabad - 500038.

¶9

... Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant

:M/s.N.B.Sudarshan

Defendants

:Ex-parte

fu^,'5

oA.NO.119/2024

:: ORDER^::

The^{ApplicantBank filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of^{Rs.20,53,95052ps from the defendantsjointlyand} severally^{with futureinterest@18o/o p'a' from the date of} application^{till the date of realization along with costs and in} default^{for sale of hypothecated assets'}

¶19

Summons^{servedon D1 to 3' They were set ex-parte0n} 13.06.2024^{as called absentand no representation'}

¶20

The Applicant^{Bank examined SumayaShaik' Legal Manager'as} AW-1^{and marked 15 documentsthroughher as Ex A'1 to Ex'} A.15.

¶21

Ld. Counsel^{for the ApplicantBank reported orders may be} passed through^{merits Perused the material placed on record'}

¶22

The^{point that arises for consideration is:-}

¶23

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the^{claimmadein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hypothecated} assets2

¶24

As stated^{supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte'The} Evidence^{Affidavitcoupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1^{to A.15 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} ctinches^{the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendantsare jointlyand severallyliable} to^pay the^{OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest} and costs. ry.rr9

¶25

oA.NO.119/2024

¶26

In the result, the present Original Application No.119/2024 is

¶27

allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.20,53,950.52ps with future interest @L2o/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 assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶30

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

¶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 Certificate according ly.

¶34

10, 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 28th Day of February, 2025).

¶35

2S<'*" SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. M/S Moghuls Paradiez.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. M/S Moghuls Paradiez.

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Talluri Clement Samson

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Bsr Earth Movers

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Madharam Ramesh

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Gajjala Madhu Mohan Reddy

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Rachamreddygari Satish Kumar Reddy

Uco Bank versus M/S Poorna Electronics