Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Protech Engineering Industries

DRT22 Aug 2025OA/195/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this OA filed by Bank of Baroda for recovery of Rs. 43.36 lakh, the Presiding Officer allowed the application after evidence was presented by the bank. The court held that the bank established its claim against the defendants who availed an overdraft facility and failed to comply. The relief granted includes recovery of principal, future interest, and proceeding against hypothecated assets and

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 43,36,300/- plus future interest @ 17.10% p.a.; recovery from hypothecated assets and other properties allowed; recovery certificate issued.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Protech Engineering Industries — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAy OF AUGUST,2c25

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.t95 OF 2O2S

¶5

Between:

¶6

Bank of Baroda, Mehdipatnam branch, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Protech Engineering Industries, Represented by its^prop: Mr Shaik Sartaz, H.No.2-71,

¶10

Sy.No. 15 & t52/ AA/ trl t, Dodapally, Medchal.

¶11

Malkajgiri Dist, Hyderabad-S00 055.

¶12

Mrs. Shaik Sartaz, w/o Sri Leyakan Shaik Ati Khan, aged 40 years, female, occ:business, Modi Residency, block- B, flat no.21B, Venkateshwara nagar, Qutbullapur Ranga Reddy, Hyderabd - 500 055.

¶13

Defendants

¶14

Counsel for the Parties:

¶15

For the Applicant Sri Srinivas Chitturu
-44:
For the Derendanrs /'2+;5i,
'!/.$ ".i:
,i: z 2 ffiPftFEE*il
1. ,n" orr,,.unffu1; asainst Derendants ror
recovery of a totiflgil?trffii:16,36,3OO/- (Rupees Forty Three
".ffiilroA

¶16

(oA.No. 19sl 202s)

¶17

Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Three Hundred only) with future interest @ 17.100/o p.a with monthry rests from date of apprication tiI the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated assets as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶18

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that Defendant no.2 is the proprietor of defendant no.1 who avaired overdraft loan facility of Rs.4O.oo lakhs on 04.0L.2023 and executed DP note, letter of continuing security, .omporite hypothecation agreement etc. The defendants hypothecated the plant and machinery in favour of appricant bank. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank crassified the account as NpA on 19.09.2024 and issued legal notice dated 19.02.2025. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶19

3' Defendants cailed absent and they were set exparte on 5.08.2025.

¶20

Sri P. Vikas, Assistant Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.9.

¶21

5.
Heaffr.@$$i trfrft\or th e Ap p I ica nt Ba n k.
.St
*"
72llu?Iffi
; d "&J'.:! r..a
i-{t."44.fum-y

¶22

(oA.No. 19sl 2O2s)

¶23

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶24

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶25

Defendants carred absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.Al to A.g. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶26

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are joinfly and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.43,36,30O/- (Rupees Forty Three Lakhs Thirty six Thousand rhree Hundred onry) with future interest @ 17.10o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization.

¶27

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of

¶28

the debt due;

¶29

rc&
; zt ilnzr ;
ww

¶30

(oA.No. 19sl 202s)

¶31

The Applicant Bank is aiso entitled to proceed aga inst the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶33

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶34

of receipt cf order.

¶35

13, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

ff;f^{,Jr:".#iT"?:i^,:Tr:[?"r]by her,corrected,sisnedand pronounced by me in the opencourton}

¶38

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

f@
'ot B
j zzmsrm :
qb*,.r-t"r9

¶40

::;,m,,,

¶41

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Protech Engineering Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Protech Engineering 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

M S Lavanya Constructions versus Karur Vysya Bank

Union Bank of India versus Sri Arella Mahesh

State Bank of India versus M/S. Cubatic Arcade Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sree Vaishnavi Stone Crusher

M S P v Amarnadha Prasad and Co. versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mr. Suryanarayana J