HDFC Ba nK Ltd., Havlng its office at # 6-3-246 & 6-3-244/ A, 3'd Floor, Desk No.0196, Roxana Palladium, Road No.1, Banjara Hills, (Besides Virinchi Hospital), Hyderabad District - 500034. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.... .Applica nt.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sri Aditya international, Rep by its Partners Aman Sethi and lvl r. Cha ndan lvlohan Serthi, Ganesh Chamber, Ground Floor, 2-2- 105 to 108/1, Ranigunj, Hyderabad - 500003, Telangana State.

¶9

Mr.Aman Sethi, S/o.Ashok Kumar Sethi, Aged 59 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No.7, Threemurthy, Road No.06, lvlahind ra Hills, West Marredpally, Nehrunagar, Hyderabad - 500026, Telangana State.

¶10

Chandan lYohan Serthi, S/o.Ashok Kumar Sethi, Aged 49 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No.7, Threem urthy, Road No.06, Mahindra Hills, West 14arredpally, Nehrunagar, Hyderabad - 500026, Telangana State.

¶11

.. . Defendants

¶12

Cou nsel for the Applicant

:M/s.14.V.Kini

Defend a nts

: ex_oarre ffi,**

oa.No,442l2024

:: g-LLLL ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum oF Rs.35,13,110/- as on 31,07.2024 from the^defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18o/o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along wlth^costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶20

Summons served on D1 to 3 through^{paper publication. They} were set ex-parte on 21.03.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined Srikanth Sukhavasi, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 25 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.25.

¶22

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

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assets?

¶25

As stated supra/ the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.25 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant ^Bank with future interest and costs. ,r/-?Lo"'f -,.

¶26

oA.NO.442lZO24

¶27

In the result, the^{present Original Application No'44212024is} allowed as under:^-

¶28

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.35,13,110/-^{as on 31.07.2024with future} interest @12.30o/o^{p'a. simple from the date} of application till^{the date of realization;}

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery^{Certiflcate accordingly'}

¶34

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno,^{corrected,signedand pronouncedbyme in the open court on} this the 22nd^{Day of April,2025).}

¶35

ffio'o*

¶36

(RAITESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Sri Aditya International

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Sri Aditya International

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

Smt Jhansi Garikipati Rep by her Gpa Holder G Adiseshaiah versus Hdfc Bank

Union Bank of India versus M/S Aqua Steel

Yes Bank Limited versus Bhupathi Chandu

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Sanjeev Katiyar

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mrs.P Geethanjali

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus M/S Lakshmi Kantha Reddy Minerals.