Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Mr.Massa @ Masa Srinivas

DRT20 Feb 2025OA/396/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed the applications of three defendants in an ex-parte manner as no representation was made. Finding the evidence affidavit and documents established the debt, the Tribunal allowed the original application for recovery of the dues and declared the mortgaged property security for the claim.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.55,81,070.73 with interest; mortgaged property declared security; recovery certificate issued.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Mr.Massa @ Masa Srinivas — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE 2oth DAY OF FEBRUARY,2025}

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL^{APPLICATIONNo: 396 OF 2024}

¶4

Karnataka Bank^Ltd., Ground Floor,^{Beside Pillar No.210,} MQ Splendour^ComPlex, Rajander Nagar,^{Ranga Reddy District'} ne-p. Oy its^{GeneralPowerof Attorney Holder'}

¶5

.....APPlicant'

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr.Massa @^{Masa Srinivas',} S/o.Masa^{Mallaiah, Aged about 47 Years,} Occ: Business,^{R/o.H.No.1 -t-246/7,} Plot No.275, Srinivas^{Nagar ColonY,} Kapra, ECIL^{Post, Medchal-Malkajgiri Dist,} Telangana State -^500062.

¶8

Smt.Massa @^MasaKalYani, W/o.M.Srinivas,^{Aged about 41 Years,} Occ: House^{Wife, R/o.H.No.l-l-24617,} Plot No.275, Srinivas^{Nagar ColonY,} Kapra, ECIL Post,^{Medchal-Malkajgiri Dist,} Telangana State -^500062.

¶9

Sri. Kuntala^Vikram, S/o.K.Narasaiah,^AgedMajor, Occ: EmPloYee,^{R/o'H. No.5-3- 193,} Ramalayam Street,^{Shanthi Nagar,} KukatPallY, Tirumalagiri, Hyderabad - 501301,^{Telangana State.}

¶10

...Defendants

¶11

: M/s'N.Rama Rao
Counsel for the Applicant
Defendants
'u*-rut!i*..,.
' i.t -'

oA.NO.396/2024

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.55,81,070.73ps from the defendants joinuy and severally with future interest @13.Soyo p.a. compounded monthly from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶16

Summons served on D1 to 3 through paper publication. They

¶17

were set ex-parte on 11.17.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined D.Omar Saheb, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 26 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.26.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^perused the

¶20

material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶22

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

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.26 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinHy and severally liabte to pay the OA claim to the4pplicant Bank with future interest and costs. '/b<r.rl -/^{19'" -}

¶24

oA.NO.396/2024

¶25

In the result, the^{present OriginalApplication No.396/2024is} allowed as under:^-

¶26

i) The Defendants are^jointly and^severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a^{sum of} Rs.55,81,070.73ps with future^interest @8.40%^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till the date of^realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured^{by way of moftgage} of^property described in the^schedule annexed to the OA and the^{applicantbank is} entitled to^proceed against the^{same to} realise its debt;

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 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, corrected, signed and^{pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 20'h Day of February,2025).

¶33

,rirl
, .,,'..-'
'-
l_
(RAMESHWAR KOTHE)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Mr.Massa @ Masa Srinivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Mr.Massa @ Masa Srinivas

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

Chavasuresh Babu versus Union Bank of India

Smt Putha Vijaya Lakshmi versus Union Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/S Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Industries.

Union Bank of India versus Dakireddy Buchi Reddy

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Shri Vardhini Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Kambala Srinivas