Allowed

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Flair

DRT20 Mar 2025OA/394/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues ₹14,87,2159.51 from loans availed by Defendant 1 and guaranteed by Defendants 2 to 10. The court held that mere pleadings denying liability could not defeat unchallenged documentary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 1,48,72,159.51 plus interest 11.50% p.a. and costs. Recovery certificate issued; order to proceed against mortgaged properties.

Indusind Bank Limited versus M/S Coverit Flair — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE TWENTIETH DAY^{OF MARCH, 2025}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE,^{B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.),M.A.} PRESIOING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{NO.394OF 2022}

¶4

Between: Indusind Bank Limited Secunderabad Branch Laxmi, 1-8-448, S.P. Road Begumpet, Secunderabad Rep by its Deputy - Vice President. ,......Applicant.

¶5

And

¶6

I	M/sCoveritFlair RepbyitsProprietor H.No.20-4-199/2/4 7 UtilityComplex ShahAliBanda Hyderabad-500065.
2.	N4r.HasanBinHamza S/oLateAbdullah AhmadBinHamza Flat No. 101, FirstFloor Alafcomplex,MCHNo.12-2-112 MuradNagar, Hyderabad-500028.
3.	lvlr.Awad BinHamza S/oLateAbdullah Ahmad BinHamza H.No.No.12-2-330/8/3 NewMCHNo. 19,lvlurad Nagar Hyderabad-500028.
4.	Mr. Saleh BinHamza S/oLateAbdullah AhmadBinHamza H.No.No.12-2-330/8/3 NewMCHNo. 19,lvlurad Nagar Hyderabad-500028. \ho-<r,q /^'/t9') .,/

¶7

oa,39412022

¶8

2 oa,39412022
5. Mr. Omar Bin Hamza
S/o Late Abdullah Ahmad Bin Hamza
H. No. No.12-2-831/54
APHB NO.60-MIGH
Mehdipatnam, HYderabad-500028.
6. Mrs. zahra Hasa
Wo Hasan Bin Hamza
H. No. No.12-2-330/8/3
New MCH No. 19, Murad Nagar
Hyderabad-500028
Also at:
MCH No. 20-5-245/A
(Portion H. No. 20-5-245)
Khazipura, Hyderabad-5002.
7. Mrs. Saleha Sultana
Wo Omar Bin Hamza
H. No. No.12-2-831/54
APHB NO.60-MiGH
Mehdipatnam, HYderabad-500028.
B. lv1/s. coverit More
Rep by its Proprietor
Shop no. 21 & 22
APHB ComPlex
Mojamjahi Market
Hyderabad-500001.
9. M/s. Coverit EnterPrises
Rep by its Partners
D. Ho.20-5-665/5-6-7
opp: Asha Talkies
Shah Ali Banda
Hyderabad-500 065.
10. !1/s Coverit, ReP bY its Proprietor
H. No. 12-2-330/B/s
New MCH No. 19, lYurad Nagar
..... Defendants'
Hyderabad-500028.
Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Peri Venkata Ramana.
counsel for Defendants 7,2,4&6 | Mr. D. Raghavulu.
:
Defendants 3, 5, 7 to 10 ExDarte. ^ -
' /%,e
t:,/

oa.39A12022

::^{qLD-LB ::}

The Applicant^{Bankfiled the present OA u/s19 of The Recovery} of Debts^{& BankruptcyAct, 1993for recoveryof a totalsum of} Rs,1,48,72,159.51^{Ps (Rs'L,44,77,535/-towards Cash Credit} account and^{Rs.3,94,624'51Pstoward FITL) fromthe} defendants^{1 to 10 jointlyand severallyas on 31'03'2022 along} with interest @11.50o/o^{p.a. till the date of realisationalong} with costs^{and sale of OA scheduleproperties'}

¶13

The facts of^{the case in brief, as per the OA averments' in brief'} are that^{defendant No.1 availedcredit facilities to a tuneof} Rs.120 lakhs to^{meet its working capital requirements between} 2011 and^{2018. Defendants2 to 10 are the guarantors to the} 1$ defendant's^{loan facilities.Defendants mortgagedthe OA} schedule^{properties as a security to the loan availed by 1st} defendant.^{Defendants executed all the necessaryloan} documents as^{requiredfrom time to time Defendant No'1} committed default^{in repaying the loan as per agreed terms'} Applicant bank^{issuednotice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act} dated 06.08.2021^{callinguponthe defendants for repaymentof} outstanding^{loan amount, followedby notice u/s 13(4)' The} total dues recoverable^{from l"tdefendantcomprises} Rs.1,44,7,5351-^{towards Cash Creditand Rs3,94,62451Ps} towards FIGL-covid-19.^{As the defendantsfailedto discharge} the dues despite^{notice,the present OA is filed for recoveryof} outstandlng dues^{from the defendants1 to 10.}

¶14

Defendant No.2^{filedwritten statement and defendants1,4and} 6 adopted the same.^{The defendants deniedof availment of} loan as well as^{other avermentsof the oA totally.They denied} Au,/^o.

¶15

,/i/'^'*

¶16

oA,39412022

¶17

of being guarantors to the loan availed by 1st defendant. They denied of applicant bank issuing notice to the defendants. The OA is filed to harass and extract money from the defendants. Accordingly, contesting defendants prayed for dismissal of the OA in the interest of justice.

¶18

Defendants 3, 5, 7 to 10 were set exparte vlde docket order dated 03.03.2023 as called absent and no representation

¶19

despite summons through paper publication.

¶20

Applicant Bank examined K. Srikanth, Chef Manager. as AW_1 and marked 50 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.50.

¶21

Defendant No. 2 examined himself as DW.1 and marked no documents.

¶22

Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant bank. Learned counsel appearing for the contesting defendants prayed that order may be passed based on records. perused the material placed on record.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant bank submits that since the defendants failed to repay the loan as per agreed terms, present OA is flled. Though defendants L,2,4 and 6 filed written statement denying availment of credit facilities and execution of loan documents, they failed to adduce evidence or cross examine AW.1 or advance arguments to prove their contentions. Defendants 3,5,7 to 10 are the guarantors to the loan availed by lst defendant firm, but they did not choose to pursue the case right from the stage of flling written statement till the stage of advancing arguments. Thus, applicant bank has amply proved its claim vide evidence affidavit of AW.1 and the Yoq<.r-

¶24

.^{/\ /a$. ,}

¶25

oa.a94l2o22

¶26

recitals in Exs. A.1 to A.50. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed for allowing the OA ln the interest of^justice.

¶27

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶28

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants 1to 10 and the OA schedule properties as prayed?

¶29

In the absence of any evidentiary^proof denying the documents relied on by the applicant bank or cross examination of AW.1 to contract the oA averments or advance arguments to^prove their contentions, mere pleadings do not come to the help of defendants in not discharging the liability. In such a situation, the Evidence Affidavit of AW.1 coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.50 marked on behalf of the Appllcant Bank remain unchallenged and unrebutted. Accordingly, the documents placed on record, coupled with the evidence affidavit of AW.1 and the recitals in exhibits A.1 to A.50 clinches the claim of the applicant bank against the defendants 1 to 10. Hence, I hold that Defendants 1 to 10 are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.394l2022 is allowed as under: -

¶31

i) the defendants 1 to 10 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.1.44,77,53 5/- towards Cash Credit account and Rs.3,94,624.51Ps towards FITL Covid.19, totalling to Rs.1,48,72,159.51Ps Ao'''t

¶32

//,, -*u .' ,/^'N'

¶33

oA.39412022

¶34

along with interest @11.50o/o^{per annum} slmple from the date of^{applicationtill the} date of realization;

¶35

it) the OA claim is secured by^way of^mortgage of OA schedule^properties and the^applicant bank is also entitled to^{proceed against the} same for realization of its debu

¶36

iii) the applicant bank is also^{entitledto proceed} against the^person and^propertiesof defendants for realisation of^{its dues; and}

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the parties concerned and} upload in Web Portal.

¶41

{Dictated to the^{steno, signed and pronouncedby me in the opencourt on this the} 2Os day of lvlarch, 2025)

¶42

EK''n"" ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Flair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Flair

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

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus M/S Rainbow Aquatech Systems

Sushila Devi Sharma versus Union Bank of India

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Vanamaali Infra Private Limited

Indusind Bank Limited versus M/S Coverit Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S De Generic Bio Tech Private Limited

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Andela Textiles Private Limited