Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. v R Global

DRT23 Jun 2025OA/733/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Original Application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad allowed the Applicant Bank's claim for recovery of dues against Defendants. The court held that mere pleadings without supporting evidence regarding blank signatures or procedural violations do not outweigh the documentary evidence and loan agreements marked on re

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 22,13,741.13 with interest at 12% p.a. simple from date of application till realization; bank entitled to proceed against person/property; costs awarded.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. v R Global — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE TWENTYTHIRD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT: SH. RAMESH$LI-OIH_E,B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 733 OF 2023

¶3

HDFC Bank Ltd. 1-L0-60/3,3.d Floor Sryodaya Complex Begumpet Hyderabad-500016. Rep by its Legal Manager.

¶4

Versus

¶5

M/s. VR Global, Represented by Authorised Signatory Flat No. 401, Vishnu pearl Near SBI Bank, White Field Kondapur, Hyderabad.

¶6

Also at: M/s. VR Global, Represented by Its Authorised Signatory VR Global, Plot No.32 HO 704/8/t/4, Sai Enclave Road No.12, Hyderabad Telangana-500034.

¶7

Mr. Ramesh Krishna VR Global, Plot No.32 HO 704/B/r/4, DRI Enclave Road No.12, Hyderabad Telangana-500034.

¶8

..... Defendants.

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant Counsel for Defendants

Mr. Srihari Bathina.

Mr. T.V.K. Murthy.

Oo'

oA.73312023

:: ORDER::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA u/s 19 of The Recovery} of Debts^{& BankruptcyAct, 1993 for recovery of a sum of} Rs.22,!3,74L^{13Ps from defendant with future interest @160lo}

¶17

p.a. with future^{interest@2olo p'm' on unpaid EMI from the} date of application^{till the date of realisation'}

¶18

The averments^{of applicant bank as per the OA' briefly' are that} defendantwassanctionedaloanofRs.30lakhsanddisbursed Rs.29,27,609/-'^{Defendant executed necessary loan agree-} mentsagreeingtothetermsandconditionsoftheloanavailed from the applicant bank^{and alsoempoweringthe applicant} bank for recovery^{of its dues in the event of default'Defendant} failed and neglected to^{repay the loan amount in accordance} with the agreed terms,^{in spite of regular remindersand} repeated requests. The^{dues outstanding against defendantare} Rs.22,13,741113Ps as on^{21.06'2023.Accordingly,the loan} account became^NPA and a^{demandnotice was issued on} 2t.06.2023.

¶19

Defendants filed written statement;^{the avermentsof which, in} brief. are applicant bank obtained^{signatures on blankprinted} formats and used the same^{in filing} the^{present OA' Defendants} were regular in^payment of loan instalments except^{due to} Covid.19 Pandemic conditions.^{The defaultin payment of EMIs} is not wilful but due to various factors like^{Covid.19 Pandemic} which are beyond their control. However, defendants^paid major^portion of the loan amount. Applicant bank intentionally declared the loan account as NPA without following the norms and guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India. Defendants have not received any demand notice including the

¶20

i/Y^v,

¶21

oA.73312023

¶22

one u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. Appticant bank has charged excessive interest from time to time contrary to RBI norms. Applicant bank has not followed due process of law at each and every stage and hence there is no cause of action to file the oA.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Sumaya Shaik, Legal Manager as AW-1 and marked 4 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4,4,

¶24

Ramesh Krishna, Defendant No.2 examined himself as DW.1 on behalf of the defendants and nor marked any evidence.

¶25

Both counsel prayed that orders may be passed based on records. Perused the material placed on record.

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the OA claim against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶28

B. Admittedly defendants committed default in repayment of loan amount for the reason of unfavourable market conditions arisen out of Covid.19 Pandemic. At the same time, defendants raised various contentions like obtaining their signatures on blank printed loan documents, classification of NPA and charging higher rate of interest contrary to RBI guidelines, However, these contentions are not supported any evidentiary material to prove the same. As regards the excessive rate of interest alleged to have been charged to the loan account, defendants have not brought on record even a single incidence of higher rate of interest if any reflected in the statement of account in

¶29

7fu.6,"

¶30

oA.73?12023

¶31

excess of the contractual^{terms or RBI guidelines'Mere} pleadings without supporting material^{evidenceare of no help to} the defendants. Nor did^{the defendants choose to cross examine} AW.1 either to the authenticity^{of the documents placed at} Ex.A.1 to A.4 or the^{signatures appearingon the same' Under} such circumstances,^{the EvidenceAffidavit of AW.1 coupled with} the recitals in Exs. A.1 to^{A.4 marked on behalf of the Applicant} Bank, clinches the claim^{of the Applicant Bank against the} Defendants. Hence, I^{hold that Defendantsare liable to pay the} OA claim to the Applicant^{Bankwith future interest and costs'}

¶32

q In the result, the^{present Original Application No.73312023 is} allowed as under:^-

¶33

i)	thedefendantsareliableto^paytothe
	applicantbankasumof^{Rs.22,t3,74l.l3Ps} alongwithinterest@l2o/o^{p.a.simplefrom} thedateofapplicationtillthe^dateof realization;
ii)	theapplicant bank is alsoentitledto^proceed againstthepersonand^propertiesof
	defendantsforrealization ofits^dues;and
iii)	theapplicant bankisentitledfor thecosts.

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

t2. Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload in Web Site.

¶37

(Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23'd day of June, 2025)

¶38

/dY".!,!e (RAIVIESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. v R Global

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. v R Global

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 Mr. Jatoth Ramachandru

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. G.D. Textiles

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. 3C Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Thanikonda Jayakrishna

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus M/S. Denimhub Life Style Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Gajjala Madanamohan Reddy