Allowed

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Enterprises

DRT20 Mar 2025OA/428/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The NAT-I allowed the original application filed by Indusind Bank for recovery of dues amounting to Rs 2,32,38,534.49 along with interest and costs against ten defendants as jointly and severally liable, confirming the mortgage security on OA schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of dues totaling Rs 2,32,38,534.49 with interest at 11.50% p.a., costs, and execution against mortgaged properties and other assets of defendants.

Indusind Bank Limited versus M/S Coverit Enterprises — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL{I AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE TWENTIETH^{DAY OF} MARCH, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MI'4ESHWAR KOTHE,^B.Com. L.LB.^(Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO, 428 oF 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

1.	lv1/s.Coverit Enterprises RepbyitsPartners D.Ho.2O-5-56s/5-6-7 Opp:AshaTalkies ShahAliBanda Hyderabad-500065.
2.	lvlr.HasanBinHamza S/oLateAbdullah Ahmad BinHamza Flat No. 101, FlrstFloor Alaf Complex,MCHNo.12-2-112 MuradNagar,Hyderabad- 500028.
3.	l4r. Awad BinHamza S/oLateAbdullah AhmadBin^Hamza H. No.No.12-2-330/8/3 NewlvlcHNo.19, MuradNagar Hyderabad-500028.
4.	Mr. Saleh BinHamza S/oLateAbdullahAhmad H.No.No.12-2-330/8/3 NewIYCHNo.19,Murad Hyderabad-500028. BinHamza Nagar

¶7

oa.42al2022

¶8

¶9

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.12-2-83U54
APHB No.60-N1IGH
Mehdipatnam, HYderabad-500028.
8. M/s. Coverit More
Rep by its Proprietor
Shop no. 21 & 22
APHB Complex
Mojamjahi Market
Hyderabad-500001.
9. M/s Coverit Flair
Rep by its Proprietor
H. No. 20-4-799/2lA
7 Utility complex
Shah Ali Banda
Hyderabad-500065.
10. lY/s Coverit, ReP bY its Proprietor
H. No. 12-2-330/8/3
New McH No. 19, Murad Nagar
..... Defendants.
Hyderabad-500028.
: Mr. Peri Venkata Ramana.
Counsel for the Applicant
Counsel for Defendants 1,2,4&6 '. Mr. D, Raghavulu,
Defendants 3,5,7 to 10

oA"42A|2O22

:: ORDER::

The Applicant^{Bankfiledthe presentOA u/s 19 of The Recovery} of Debts &^{BankruptcyAct, 1993 for recoveryof a totalsum of} Rs.2,323A,534.4gPs^{(Rs 2,26,83,126'99Pstowards Cash Credit} account and^{Rs.5,55,407'5OPstoward FITL) fromthe} defendants^{1 to 10 jointlyand severallyas on 31 03 2022along} with interest @11.50o/o^{p.a. till the date of realisationalong} with costs^{and sale of OA scheduleproperties'}

¶14

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.27O lakhs^{between 2011 and 2018'Defendants2 to 10 are} its Partners with^{defendantNo'2 belng theManaging Partner'} Defendants^{2 to 10 stood as guarantorsto the1st defendant's} loan facilities.^{Defendantsmortgaged the OA schedule} properties as a security^{to the loan availed by 1st defendant'} Defendants^{executedall the necessaryloan documentsas} required from^{time to time. DefendantNo 1 committedbreach} in repaying the^{loan as agreed upon Applicantbank issued} notice u/s 13(2)^{of theSARFAESIAct calling uponthe} defendants for^{repayment of outstanding loan amount'The} total dues^{comprises ol Rs.2,26,83,72699PstowardsCash} Credit account^{and Rs.5,55,407.50Ps towardFITLCovid 19} totalllng to Rs-2,323A,534.49Ps.^{As there ls no response from} the defendants^{despite notice, the present OA is filedfor} recovery of outstanding^{dues from the defendants1 to 10'}

¶15

Defendant No.2 filed^{written statement and defendants1,4 and} 6 adopted the same.^{Thedefendants deniedof availment of} loan as well as other^{averments of the OA} ffi,;^{tolally. They denied}

¶16

oa-42a12o22

¶17

of being guarantors to the loan availed by 1.t defendant. Applicant bank has not issued any 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 vide docket order dated 03.03.2023 as called absent and no representation, despite summons through paper publication.

¶19

5 Applicant Bank examined Varadaraj Devaraj, Deputy Vice President, as AW-1 and marked 43 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.43.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

B. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant bank submits that since the defendants failed to repay the loan as per agreed terms, present OA is filed. Though defendants !, 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. The other defendants 3,5,7 to 10 are the partners of 1st defendant firm, but they failed to pursue the case right from the stage of filing written statement till the stage of advancing arguments. Under such circumstances, the .*,ro : , C -

¶23

''L(')

¶24

oA.42Al2022

¶25

the applicant bank is amply proved vide evidence affidavit of AW.1 and the recitals in Exs. A.1 to A.31, Accordingly, learned counsel prayed for allowing the OA in the interest ofjustice.

¶26

9, The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶27

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

¶28

In the absence of any evidentiary material to disprove the documents relied on by the applicant^{bank or crossexamine the} AW,1 or advance arguments^{to prove their contentions'mere} pleadings denying the^{OA averments and the documents} produced by^{AW 1 vide exhibits A'1 to A'43 do not entitle} defendantstoclaimanyreliefordenytheliability.Insucha situation,^{the EvidenceAffldavit of AW 1 coupledwiththe} ,..itur,^{in the documents} "i'";Il"^{j"'" t",#l} ff.it.:: behalf^{of the Applicant,,,^''} n.."a"nt,^{placed on record,} unrebutted.^{Accordingly, t11,.,."_"} ",^{o*., and the recitalsin} .oupr"a^{ltt the evidence.afiloavr',.} the^{applicantbank} "t '"n'.' o' ': ^:1':"i::T.:l-'";:;' ' '."'' .."::::::T':; aeainst^{the t**i::t:"'J;;} riabre^{to pav the oA crarn} ,- 1n are iointly^anu l" in,"r"r, und^.ot,t' is ooou**^{uunn *'- *'::'";,;:",} Apprication^No.42sl2022

¶29

--.,rt^{the Pres(}

¶30

In^{the re'"'''}

¶31

'{ allo,r.ied^{as under: -} . ^ t0^{are jointly and} ,,""",::J::',1:: ili:i;,lt[i:,::'1 sum^{ot cs z'ZO'g:'"" -} :" '-

¶32

o A'42812022

¶33

¶34

Credit^{account and Rs'5' 55'407'50Ps towards} FITL^{Covid'19, i'Q''Rs'2'32'38'534'49Ps} along^{with interest@11'50o/oper annum} simple^{from the date of applicationtill the} date^{of realization;} the OA^{claim is secured by way of mortgage} ii) of OA^{scheduleproperties and the applicant} bank is^{also entitled to proceed against the} same^{for realization of its debt;} iii) the applicant^{bank is also entitledto proceed} against the^{person and properties of} defendants 1 to^{10 for realisationof its dues;} and iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶35

L2. The Applicant Bank is directed to file cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 74. Communicate a , or this order to the parties concerned and uproad in web ,;:l l?lf:1T:fiiiilTii;i*ned^and pronounced by me in the open court on this the

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indusind Bank Limited v. M/S Coverit Enterprises

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 Flair

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

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