Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Someswara Cotton Corporation

DRT27 Feb 2025OA/279/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad allowed the banks original application for recovery of a loan sum from three respondents who failed to pursue their defense.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.3,62,41,587.38 with future interest; OA secured by mortgaged assets; entitlement to recover against person and properties; costs awarded.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S Someswara Cotton… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE TWENTYSEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 279 OF 2024

¶3

Karnataka Bank Ltd. 20128-1, Rajshri Hotel Complex Railway Station Road, Adoni Kurnool Dist. Andhra Pradesh Rep by its GPA.

¶4

....Applicant.

¶5

And

¶6

lv/s. Someswara Cotton Corporation Rep by its Proprietor Smt. Medehal Suvarna C/o D. No, !7/734 and 734/A Alur Road, AMC Yard Road Adhoni, Kurnool Dist. Andhra Pradesh - 518 301.

¶7

Smt. Medehal Suvarna W/o M. Govardhan Aged about 46 years

¶8

Occ: Business, HIG-43

¶9

APHB Colony, Near Arts College Adoni, Kurnool District Andhra Pradesh-518301.

¶10

Sri l'ledehal Govardhan S/o M. Naganna Goud Aged about 50 years Occ: E usiness, HIG-43 APHB Colony, Near Arts College Adoni, Kurnool District Andhra Pradesh-518301.

¶11

,.,.. Defendants.

¶12

Counsel for Applicant : Mr. N. Rama Rao. Defendants : No representalion.No representalion.representalion.

¶13

: No representalion.No representalion.representalion.

1ftr,"'

oa.27912024

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.3,62,41,587.38Ps jointly and severally from the defendants with future interest @17.50olo per annum compounded monthly from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs and sale OA schedule assets.

¶19

The averments of applicant bank as per the OA, briefly, are that 1"t defendant is the borrower, 2nd defendant is its proprietrix and 3rd defendant is the guarantor to the overdraft facility of Rs.1,25,00,000/- vide sanction tetter dated 72.OZ.ZOL6. Defendants executed requisite loan documents for the said facility. After some part payments, defendants committed default resulting classification of loan account as NpA by 29.06.2018. Defendants acknowledged the debt and promised to clear the dues as early as possible. Applicant issued demand notice under SARFAESI Act on 22.10.2019, foltowed by legal notice dated 24.06.2023. Despite notice, defendants failed to discharge the liability. Hence the present OA.

¶20

Though defendants entered appearance through Advocate, Ivlr. T. Nagender, did not choose to file written statement. Hence defendants right of filing written staternent was forfeited vide docket order dated 18.10.2024.

¶21

Applicant Bank examined Dhoklay Khajamoinuddtn, Assistant Manager and GPA Holder, as AW-1 and marked 27 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to E*.A.2?.OK*

¶22

oa.27912024

¶23

Defendants right to adduce^{evidence was forfeited on} 31,01.2025 for there^{being no representation.}

¶24

Heard learned counsel^{appearingfor the applicantLearned} counsel appearing^{for the defendantsreported no oral} arguments.^{Perusedthe materialplacedon record'}

¶25

Learned counsel appearing^{for the applicant submitsthat} defendants did not^{pursue the case either by filing written} statement or^{adducing evidence or advancingarguments'} Therefore, applicant^{bank is entitled to the OA claim in view of} evidence alfidavit^{of AW.1 coupled with recitals in ExhibitsA 1} to A.27. Accordingly,^{learned counselprayed for allowing the} OA claim in favour of^{the applicantbank and againstthe} defendants.

¶26

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

¶27

whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the OA claim^againstthe Defendants and oA schedule^assets?

¶28

As stated^{supra, of the two defendants have not pursuedthe} case except entering^{apPearance through his counselUnder} such circumstances,^{the Evidence Affidavit of Aw.1coupled with} the recitals in documents^{viz., Exs.A.1to A.27 marked on behalf} of the Applicant Bank^{remains unchallenged and unrebutted and} thus clinches the claim^{of the Applicant Bank against the} Defendants. Hence I^{found that defendants 1 to 3 are jointly} and severally are^{liable to pay the claim made by the Applicant} Bank in the o.A. with^{future interest and t"firy.v}

¶29

oA.27912024

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.279/2O24 allowed as under: -

¶31

i) defendants are liable to pay a sum of Rs.3,62,41,587.38Ps to the applicant bank with future interest @12olo per annum simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage /hypothecation of assets described in the schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for recovery of its debt;

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶35

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶36

L2. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload on Web Portal.

¶38

(Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27ft day of February, 2025).

¶39

Sjrrs!9 SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Someswara Cotton Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Someswara Cotton Corporation

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

chakradhara agarbathi industries versus Syndicate Bank

Narmula Santhosh Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

The Axis Bank Limited., versus Siris Impex

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Kante Sai Charan

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus S Satish Chandra Reddy

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S Sree Someswara Agencies