Allowed

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. v. Raghuveer Reddy

DRT21 Feb 2025OA/343/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-II at Hyderabad allowed an Original Application filed by Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. for recovery of dues. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed sum with future interest and costs, granting the bank permission to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets. A Recovery Certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 8,01,89,377.91 as on 25.04.2024 with future interest; permission to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets; directed to file cost memo.

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. versus… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (HonS.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 343 OF 2024

¶4

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd., Acting in Its Capacity of Trustee of Pegasus Group Thirty Nine Trust 1, Having Corporate Office at 55-56, sth Floor, Free Press House, Nariman Point, l,lumbai - 400021 and one of its Representative Office at Flat No.1C, First Floor, HMH Plaza, New No.56(o) 105, G.N.Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600017. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ragh uveer Reddy,

¶8

s/o. Ma lla Reddy Madi Reddy, H.No.76-l-27 /812, laya naga r Colony, Opp Prime Swimming Pool, Saidabad, Hyderabad - 500059.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

Nakshatra Heath Care Pvt Ltd,, Plot No.54, Sy.No.9/1/K, LB Nagar Circle, Saroornagar Ma ndal, Opp Traffic PS, Hyderabad - 500074.

¶11

Archana Potha, W/o.Raghuveer Reddy, H.No.76-7-27 /8/2, laya nagar Colony, Opp Prime Swimming Pool, Saidabad, Hyderabad - 500059.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant

¶14

Defendants

¶15

: Ivl/s.G.Bhanu Murthy

¶16

: Ex-parte

¶17

1'tt'r-2. '1? ,^{, /,r-*-}

oA.NO.343/2024

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^{present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.8,O¹ ,89,377^{.97ps as on 25.04.2024 from the} defendants^jointly and^{severallywithfutureinterest@ 10.55o/o} p.a. with monthly rests @ 2%^p.m. from the^{date of applicatlon} till the date of realization^{along with costs and in default for} sale of OA schedule^proPerty.

¶22

Summons served on D1 and^{2 throughpaper publication.They} were set ex-parte on 29.10.2024 as^{called absentand no} representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined^{MaheshKumar, SeniorManager,} as AW-1 and marked^{11 documents throuqh him as Ex. A.1 to} Ex. A.11.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^{Perused the} material^placed on record.

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte.^The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the^documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.11 marked on behalf of the^{ApplicantBank} 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 ryith^{futureinterest} andcosts. OXC

¶28

oA.NO.343/2024

¶29

In the result, the present Original Application No.343/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶30

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.8,01,89,377.91ps as on 25.04.2024 with future interest @11olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶31

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶32

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

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery Certifi cate according ly.

¶36

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 21n day of February, 2025).

¶37

tvw'ooI

¶38

l6efresnwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. v. Raghuveer Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. v. Raghuveer Reddy

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

Union Bank of India versus Mandulla Yadagiri Prasad

V Satya Prasad Akula and Others versus Iifl Home Finance Ltd.

R%20RAMANJINAMMA versus Tadipatri Coop Town Bank Ltd.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S Vaishnavi Constructions

Uco Bank versus Smt.Mauram Rajitha

The Axis Bank Limited versus Tasleem Enterprises