Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Cipel

DRT31 Jan 2025OA/639/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 145,36,147 along with future interest and costs against four respondents who remained non-present. The court directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,45,36,147 with future interest @ 10.50%! p.a. simple from the date of application till realization, costs, and issue a Recovery Ce

Union Bank of India versus M/S Cipel — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

iN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.II AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS THE^{31ST DAY OF JANUARY,2025}

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application^{No: 639 OF 2023}

¶4

Union Bank of^India., Madhapur Branch,^Hyderabad. Rep. by its Chief^Manager.

¶5

...Applica nt

¶6

Versus

¶7

tvl/s.cipel.,

¶8

Rep by its Managing^Partner Shri Pervez Khan^{Son of Not Known} To Applicant, 307,^ChallaPride, Plot No.4, 7^{-2-t735181315,CZECH} Colony, Sanathnagar,^{Hyderabad-500018.}

¶9

Sh ri Pervez^Khan, Son of Not Known^{to Applicant, 307,} challa Pride, Plot^{No.4,7-2-1735/873/5,} CZECH Colony, Sanath^nagar, Hydera bad- 500018.

¶10

Shri Nandavanam Srinivas^ReddY, S/o of Not Known to^Plaintiff, Pa rtner lY/s.CiPel, 307, Challa Pride, Plot^{No.4, 7-7-7735/873/5,} CZECH Colony,^Sanathnagar, Hydera bad - 500018.

¶11

M/s.Kompass Infrastructures^{Pvt Ltd.,} Regd Office #108, Challa^Pride, 7 -2-173s &.^{7 -2-7873/} 5/^A, CZECH Colony, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad - 5OOO1B.

¶12

..... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant^{: M/s.P.Balaji} Defendants : Ex-Parte

0%,.*

OA.No.639/2023

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank fited the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.1,45,36,747 / - from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @ 24o/o p.a. with monthly rests from 01.06.2023 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶19

Summons served on D1 to 3, whereas summons served on D4 through paper publication. They were set ex_parte on 26.06.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Srinvasa Reddy Estramuli, Chief

¶21

Manager as AW-1 and marked 14 documents through him as Ex.

¶22

A.1 to Ex.A. 14.

¶23

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated orders may be passed on

¶24

merits and perused the material placed on reco rd.

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the ctaim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hotd that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶28

In the result, the present Original Apptication No.639/2023 is

¶29

allowed as under: - 4Y'r*

¶30

oA.No.639/2023

¶31

¶32

i) The Defendants^{are jointly and severallyliable to pay to} theApplicantBankasumofRs'1'45'36'147/-wtth future^{interest@ 10'50o/o p'a' simple' from the date of} application^{till the date of realization;}

¶33

ii) the applicant^{bank is also entitled to proceedagainst} the^{person and propertiesof the defendantfor} realization^{of its dues;}

¶34

iii) the applicant^{bank is entitled for the costs'}

¶35

B. 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.}

¶37

Communicate a^{copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno., transcribed^{by him,corrected,signedand pronounced by me in the} open court on this the 31"^{day of January, 2025)}

¶38

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Cipel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Cipel

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

Bismi Traders versus Perinthalmanna Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Asil Mohammed versus Federal Bank

Mohd Asif Rangoonwala and Others versus Axis Bank

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Kukalakuntla Lahari

Bank of Baroda versus Mohammed Aslam Khan

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Gayatri Traders