Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Star Traders

DRT10 Jul 2025OA/349/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's Original Application for recovery of Rs.21,88,089.22 with interest and costs from the Defendants, holding them jointly and severally liable based on the evidence and hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.21,88,089.22 with future interest; claim secured by hypothecated assets; entitlement to proceed against defendants' properties for realization; costs awarded.

Bank of Baroda versus Star Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1OTH DAY OF ]ULY, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAIV]ESHWAR KoTHE, B.com,, L.LB. (HonS,), IY,A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 349 OF 2025

¶5

Ban k of Ba roda., Attapur Branch, 3- 4- 17 4 172 Penusila Complex, Near Pilar No.140 PVNR Express Way, Attapur Hyderabad - 500048. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.,...Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Star Traders., Rep by its^proprietor N4oha mmed Azeem uddin S/o. Mohammed Faq ruddin R/o. 1-4-848-3, Bakaram, M usheerabad Hyderabad - 500020.

¶9

Mohammed Azeemuddin S/o. N4ohammed Faq ruddin Aged 59 Years, Occ: Business R/o. t-4-848-3, Ba karam, Musheerabad Hyderabad - 500020.

¶10

... Defenda nts

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.G.Venkat Sri Maithreya

Defendants

: Ex- pa rte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.21,88,089.22ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @11.3590 p.a. from 03.04,2025 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecaled assets.^,.':'a

¶16

oA.NO.349/2025

¶17

Summons sent to D1 and 2 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex-parte on 12.06.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Swarupa Bheem Reddy, Sr. Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 16 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.16.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the material placed on record.

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assefsz

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A,1 to A.16 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No.349/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.21,88,089.22ps with Juture interest 0{'''"

¶25

oA.NO.349/2025

¶26

@9.600/o^{p,a' simple from the date of} application^{till the date of realization;}

¶27

ii) the^{OA claim issecured bY way of} hypothecation^{of assets describedin the} schedule annexed^{to the OA and the} applicant^{bank is entitledto proceed against} the same to^{realiseits debt;}

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant^{bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶30

B. The^{ApplicantBank is directed to file CostMemowithin2 weeks} from the date^{of receipt of this Order'}

¶31

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly'}

¶32

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno,.o,i".t"d,^{signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 10th^{Day ofJuly'2025)}

¶33

i^,\r., .,,i )r⁾ 'i:'-)"-

¶34

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Star Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Star Traders

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Sai Krupa Concrete Blocks Industries

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Pulaila Sreekanth

State Bank of India versus Paramathmuni Balakrishna Murthy

Union Bank of India versus N Raju

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Qamar Ahmed Qureshi

Indian Bank versus Ms John Upvc Windowsand Doors