Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rise Automobiles

DRT5 Feb 2025OA/26/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Original Application filed by Canara Bank against a partnership firm and its guarantors for recovery of loans and secured amounts was allowed. The tribunal held the bank entitled to recover the claimed sums with interest and costs, directing the issue of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants held jointly and severally liable to pay total sum of Rs.3,09,44,141.91ps with future interest and costs; recovery certificate to be issued.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Rise Automobiles — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE sTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER OA.No.25 ol2023

¶3

Between:

¶4

Canara Bank, Narayanaguda branch, YMCA road, Opp Shanti Talkies, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad - 500 029. Rep by its authorized officer

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. Rise Automobiles, 7-18, Opp. Vijetha Super Market, Krishna Devaraya colony, Serilingampally, Madinaguda, Hyderabad - 500 050.

¶8

Represented by its authorized person

¶9

Sri Pattela Sailaja, w/o P.V. Narasimha Rao, female, major, occ: business, R/o plot no.592, flat no.305, NS Mountain view Apartments, Arora college, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶10

Sri Pattela Srinivas Goutham, s/o P.V. Narashimha Rao, aged about 35 years, male, R/o plot no.592, flat no.305, NS Mountain view Apartments, Arora college, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶11

Pattela Sri Gaurav, s/o P. V. Narasimha Rao, aged about 32 years,

¶12

(oA.No.2612023)

¶13

R/o plot no.592, flat no.305, NS Mountain view Apartments, Arora college, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶14

Defendants

¶15

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Sri Manav Gecil Thomas For the Defendants No.1 & 3 Sri T. Vijay Kumar DeFendants No.2 & 4 Sri Lalith Kumar

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.g,Lg,44,747.glps (Rupees Three crores Eighteen Lakhs Forty Four Thousand seven Hundred Forty Seven and paise Ninety Seven only) i,e.,

¶18

a) A sum of Rs.2,25,08 ,968.24ps in respect of OCC limit with future interest @ 9.70% p.a from 23.12.2022 till the date of realization;

¶19

b)A sum of Rs.12,33,66r/- in respect of covid funded interest term loan account with future interest @ 11.20% p.a from 23.12.2022 tiil the date of reatization ;

¶20

c) A sum of Rs.21,40,107/- in respect of working capital demand loan with future interest @ B.BO% p.a from 23.L2.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶21

(oA.No.2612023)

¶22

d) A sum of Rs.46,62,971.73ps in respect of GECL account with future interest @ 9.40% p.a from 23.t2.2022 till the date of realization;

¶23

e) A sum of Rs.2,42,060/- in respect of loan account No.0649747000007 with future Interest @ 9.45olo p.a from

¶24

23.12.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶25

f) A sum of Rs.10,56,9g0/- in respect of loan accou nt No.0649747000008 with future interest @ 9.70o/o p.a from

¶26

23.72.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶27

and in default for sale of mortgaged properUes as described in the schedule "A to C,, to OA.

¶28

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a partnership firm / borrower and defendants 2to 4 are the guarantors to the roan avaired by defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 company avaired overdraft faciilties dated 20.03.2019 for a sum of Rs.1,90,00,000/- and executed deed of hypothecation of machinery dated 03.06.2019. Defendant no.1 and 4 executed a guarantee agreement and defendant no.3 executed supprementar memorandum of deposit of tifle deeds dated 20.03.20tg. Defendants 1 and 2 executed a guarantee agreement in favour of Appricant bank. Subseque.J (i\ et,ie 9ggregate^{limit of Rs.1,90,00,00,000/-}

¶29

l. i'r rtP

¶30

was eirhaRced to.lnr.z,t2.iib,o0,0000/-on collateral security of hypotlr ecatio8 qf 6iqch?5and *r inery. The defendants mortgaged

¶31

(oA.No.26l2023)

¶32

the schedule mentioned properties^..A to C,, in favour of Applicant bank After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued demand notice dated 04.12.202t. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶33

sri r. Vijay Kumar filed vakalath for Defendants 1 & 3 and sri Lalith Kumar filed vakalath for defendants 2 and 4 but failed to file written statements.

¶34

Sri V. Mahesh, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.34.

¶35

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

Counsel for defendants filed vakalath but failed to file Written statemen the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiat of tfib - d;ffi.,f-i as examined and he exhibited relevant documents qs [x.A1 to A.34.,-'l:' n view of the above, I hold that the l, :^r.1 tfl?5 their claim made in the OA against

¶39

(oA.No.2612023)

¶40

the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entiged to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶41

B. In the result, the present oA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.3,tg44,l4l.9lps (Rupees Three crores Eighteen Lakhs Forty Four Thousand seven Hundred Forty seven and paise Ninety seven only) i.e.,

¶42

a) A sum of Rs.z,25,oB,968.24ps in respect of occ limit with future interest @^g.7Oo/o p.a from 23.12.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶43

b) A sum of Rs.12,33,667/- in respect of covid funded interest term loan account with future interest @ 11.20o/o p.a from 23.t2.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶44

c) A sum of Rs.21,40,L07/- in respect of working capital with future interest @ B.B0% p.a from 23.t2.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶45

d) A sum of Rs.46,62,971.73ps in respect of GECL account with future interest @ 9.40olo p.a from 23.L2.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶46

e)A in respect of loan account ture interest @ 9.45o/o p.a from realization ;

¶47

(oA.No.2612023)

¶48

A sum of Rs.10,56,980/- in respect of loan account No.0649747000008 with future interest @ 9.70olo p.a from 23.L2.2022 till the date of realization ;

¶49

The Applicant bank is entiUed to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in the schedule "A to C" to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶50

The Applicant Bank is arso entitred to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶51

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

¶52

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶53

Issue Recovery ceftificate accordingly.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶55

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open colrt on this the sth day of Feb, 2025)

¶56

sdl_
r F.GoPtcHAND)
\PREStDtNG OFFTCER
Y<. <r\x
^'
,.rr. [,'.cJiJ{tii''u *

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rise Automobiles

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rise Automobiles

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

K Manohar Reddy versus Reliance Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

D Sadanand and others versus Indian Bank

State Bank of India versus Valluri Dhanunjaya Rao

S T Bharanikanth versus Indian Overseas Bank

Smt. Sandya Joshi versus Idbi Bank

State Bank of India versus v. Business Enterprises LLP