Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Magic Beauty Parlor

DRT22 Apr 2025OA/464/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of a term loan of Rs. 27,44,290.54 plus future interest against two defendants. The debt was secured by hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 27,44,290.54 with future interest at 9.30% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Magic Beauty Parlor — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

,<br>

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶4

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.

¶5

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶6

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO: 464 OF 2024

¶7

Union Bank of India,, Bachupally Branch, Survey No.3 & 6, MLR^ComPlex, Bachupally X Road,^Hyderabad, Telangana^- 500091' Rep. by its^{BranchManager.}

¶8

.....ApPlicant.

¶9

M/s'Magic^BeautY 'uno''U:"ut IJJ:JJ::',X?^{f,o [!"I l; o''} "'o' 'ff*;,ifu1,q'gpf.;q.t,+'%u)1r1n.u, shaik' 'ffi!'ttfi,tr;qr,'tffi: 2^rabassum :lLlTi;,I/3;:1"#i,:"ga lf"1[1i,ffi;;[1::"trffi Derendan,s counserrortheAppricanr',:,*}::tt'-i,il:."-.i.S Defendants

oA.NO.464/2024

:: gLLEL::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.27,44,290.54ps under Term Loan A/c.No. 162016180000016 from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @(11.55o/o + 2olo penal) p.a, with monthly rests from the date of apprication ti, the date of rearization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶14

2' summons served on D2, whereas summons sent to D1 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex_parte on 03.t2.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶15

The Applicant I "*^{,;;;;..iilTT}ffiil,T:,p1van,Bank Manaser,as} tgh him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4. Ld, Counsel fo passed,nrornnt-tnl^{ApplicantBank} r s rhepoint,r",":::'::^{;";;;:ffi::J;Hjilffi:'}

¶16

'rses for consideration is:_

¶17

[!,i:::::APPtica^{n t Ba} n k ;.";wr:":,z,ziiij,xlii . 6. As stated supra,

¶18

srio"n..lffi' ^jl:, o".ndants ren viz., Exs.4.1 " ^ iiTi"l -,,;;;.::X"''"0^ex-parre. rhe jflir{=*ffi,I,ffi

nfiir$;,;:,u"*"

oA.NO.464/2024

In the result, the present Original Application No.464/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.27,44,290.54ps under Term Loan A/c.No. 162016180000016 with future interest @9.30o/o^p.a. simple from the date^of application till the date of realization;

¶24

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;

¶25

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

¶26

lv) the applicant bank is entitled for the^costs'

¶27

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost^{Memowithin2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶28

Issue Recovery Certiflcate accordingly.

¶29

Communicate a copy of this order^{to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and^pronounced by^{mein the open court on} this the 22^d Day of April,^2025).

¶30

/0w".*'

¶31

lr6r(esnwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Magic Beauty Parlor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Magic Beauty Parlor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

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.