Allowed

Indian Bank v. Mr. Jakkula Amarender

DRT9 Jan 2025OA/345/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No.345 of 2024, the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Hyderabad allowed the applicant bank's claim against the defendant for recovery of Rs.21,27,437 onwards with future interest and costs following an ex-parte hearing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.21,27,437 with future interest at 13.10% p.a. and costs of the OA.

What the court decided

Indian Bank versus Mr. Jakkula Amarender — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY'2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA.No.345 of 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Indian Bank, Yellareddyguda branch, Narketpalli, Yellareddyguda, OppAmmanabole X road, NH.9, Narketpa I I iYellareddyg uda, Nalgonda district, Telangana State. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. JakkulaAmarender, S/o Mr. Venkaiah, major, R/o No.1-9lB main road, Narketpally, Nalgonda dist.

¶9

Defendant

¶10

Sri R.V. Subba pa rte

¶11

The t OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2L,27,437l_ (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Seven only) with future interest @ 13.10% p.awith monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization.

¶12

(oA.No.345/2024)

¶13

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed term loan facility of Rs.30,97,000/-, clean OD facility of Rs.1.00 lakh and bank guarantee of Rs.4.00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 09.01.2019. The defendant executed demand promissory note, medium term loan agreement, agreement of hypothecation of movables and various other necessary documents. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and seized the hypothecated vehicle and sold in auction and appropriated a sum of Rs.10,10,000/- on 07.03.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶14

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 04.LL.2024.

¶15

Sri B. Venkatesh, Officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself AS AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked AS Ex.A.1 to A. 15.

¶16

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶17

The point tha r consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is
entitl
in the OA against the Defendant as
o.ur"3'ff.,
*
l, 09lnNnr
A.i;
,l

¶18

(oA. No.34sl2024)

¶19

7' Defendant remained 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.15. In view of the above, I hord that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶20

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a totar sum of Rs.2L,27,437l- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred and rhirty seven onry) with future interest @ 13.10olo p.afrom the date of application till the date of realization;

¶21

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶22

and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

72.
accordingly.
w
&$
09
,rAN 7tr2s lii
tr
../J-,:r
,**f}-1#
s?o
YEt<br>

¶26

(oA.No.34sl2024)

¶27

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶28

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of lan, 2025)

¶29

sdl_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶30

a\i
,A
*

¶31

frvt;y
#i''ffi;"^n

¶32

Indian Bank v. Mr. Jakkula Amarender

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Indian Bank v. Mr. Jakkula Amarender

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S. R.P. Industry

Arekatike Narsamma Arekatike Ashok versus Aptus Value Housing Finance India Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Sri Shaik Ibrahim

Mrs Balne Manjula versus Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Ragula Kavitha

Smt M Sarada Devi versus State Bank of India