Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Industries.

DRT19 Feb 2025OA/411/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 84,41,293.44 with future interest from Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Industries. The defendant appeared ex-parte. The Tribunal held the defendant liable and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 84,41,293.44 with future interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued; Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets.

Canara Bank versus M/S Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Industries. — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-]I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 411 OF 2024

¶4

M/s.Canara Bank., Ananta pu r Ma in Branch-I, D.No. 12-3-50, Sai Enclave, Sai Nagar 3'd Cross, Ananta^pur - 515001. Rep. by its Authorized Officer.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sri Laksh m i Venkateswara Industries., O/o.Sy.No.7 46/2, Plot No.33 and 34, Raminepalli, Ana nta pur - 575722.

¶8

Also at:P ot No.33 & 34, APIIC Land, Gond ireddypa lli Village, Raminepally, Rapthadu Manda l, Anantapur - 515722.

¶9

... Defendant

¶10

: lvl/s.Manav Gecil Thomas Counsel for the Applicant Defendant : Ex-parte

¶11

:: :: $[f[

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.84,41,293.44ps (Rs.75,99,924.73ps under Term Loan 170004506706 and Rs.8,41,368.71ps under WC 125003999027) from the defendant with future interest @ 360lo ev^c

¶13

oA.NO.411/2024

¶14

p.a. from 07.08.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶15

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex-pade on 79.71.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶16

The Applicant Bank examined A.Ramesh Babu, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A. 10.

¶17

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material^placed on record.

¶18

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶19

whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated assefs ?

¶20

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.l to A.10 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to^pay the OA^claimto the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶21

In the result, the^present Original Application No.411/2024^is allowed as under:^-

¶22

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.84,4r,293.44ps (Rs.75,991924.73ps under fu""a

¶23

oA.NO.411/2024

¶24

Term Loan 170004506706^and Rs.8,41,368.71ps under WC 125003999027) with future interest @10%^{p.a, simplefrom} the date of application till the date^of realization;

¶25

ii) the OA claim is secured bY way^of hypothecation of assets described in^the schedule annexed to the OA and^the applicant bank is entitled to^{proceed against} the same to realise^its debt;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to^{file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this Order'}

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate^accordingly'

¶30

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the parties concerned.} (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed^{and pronouncedbymein the open court on} this the 19th Day of^{February, 2025).}

¶31

ffit'r'r MESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. M/S Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Industries.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Industries.

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

Ms Bvk Enterprises versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Ashok Palem

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Shaik Ghouse Pasha

Smt Putha Vijaya Lakshmi versus Union Bank of India

Chavasuresh Babu versus Union Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus Dakireddy Buchi Reddy