Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Limra Digital Studio

DRT18 Feb 2025OA/296/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues against the borrowers and permissible itself to proceed against hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 25,92,941.26 plus future interest; assets proceeded against for realization; costs allowed.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Limra Digital Studio — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 18th^{DAYOF FEBRUARY,2025}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB. (HONS.),M'A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 296 OF 2024}

¶4

Union Bank of India., Bach upally Branch, Survey No.3&6,^{MLR Complex,} Bachupally X Road, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500091. Rep. by its Authorized Officer.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

lvl/s. Limra Digital Studio., Represented by its Proprietor Mr.Mohammed Yun us, Office at H. No.11-3-362/74/8, Srinivasa Na9ar, Warasiguda, Hyderabad - 500061.

¶8

Mr.l,lohammed Yunus, S/o.Yusuf, Aged about 43 Years, Occ: Business, H.No.11-3-362/1418, Srinivasa Na9ar, Warasiguda, Hyderabad - 500061.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

H.No.3-9- 130/11, Lalitha Naga^r Colony, West Ma rredpally, Secunderabad - 500026.

¶11

... Defenda nts

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

:lvl/s.V.Sethu Madhava nao $ V. Sl^trtnatrr

Defendants

:Ex-parte

oA.NO.296/2024

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.25,92,94f .26ps under Term Loan A/c. No.162016170000003 from the defendants joinUy and severally with future interest @15.80o/o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶19

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 74.1,0.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined K.V.Sai^pavan, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 13 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.13.

¶21

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank 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 claim made in the OA against the Defendants and oA hypothecated assets?

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.13 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest andcosts. /fM* (-/ "s"-

¶25

oA.NO.296/2024

¶26

In the result, the present Original Application No.296/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶27

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.25,92,94L.26ps under Term Loan A/c.No.162016170000003 with future interest @11.55o/o^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶28

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;

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the^costs.

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

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 18th Day of February, 2025).

¶34

$50'," ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Limra Digital Studio

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Limra Digital Studio

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

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/S Tribal Mantra India Private Limited

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Budigapaka Sekhar

Sri Narender Reddy Soma versus Piramal Capital Housing Finance Ltd.

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) versus M/S Sri Balaji Polyvision.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Vasilissa Beauty and Nail Salon

Union Bank of India versus M/S Unique Packaging Enterprises