Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. v Mod Enterprises

DRT25 Apr 2025OA/856/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application filed jointly and severally against two defendants for recovery of a loan amount of Rs.1,12,81,563.74 plus interest, as the defendants forfeited their right to file a written statement by failing to appear for evidence and arguments despite entering appearance.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs.1,12,81,563.74 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against person/property and recover costs.

Indian Overseas Bank versus v Mod Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE TWENTYFIFTH DAY CF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com, L.LB. (HonS.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO, 856 OF 2023

¶3

Between:

¶4

Indian Overseas Bank Adarsh Nagar Branch 5-9-3054, Paiga Plaza Bldg. Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-29. Rep by its Constituted Attorney & GPA Holder & Principal Officer.

¶5

....Applicant.

¶6

And

¶7

Ivlls. V. MOD Enterprises Prop Sri B. Taraka Mahesh Plot No.3/Part, 1st Floor Gat-1, GMK Building Opp: Court Lane Rajiv Gandh i Nagar Prshanthi Nagar, Ku katpally Hyderabad, Telangana-500072.

¶8

Also at:

¶9

H. No.8-312-18, Plot No.46llpart Padma nagar Phase-2, Chinta I Medchal (Malkajgiri) Qutubullapur,^Hyderabad Tela nga na - 5000 54.

¶10

B. Taraka lvlahesh S/o LatrE. Ranga ia h Age: Major, Flat No.301 Prinka Residency, Road I!o.5, Buddha Naga r Colony Peerzadiguda, Uppa I Depot. Boduppal, Ra nga Reddy Dist. ]'ela nqana-500092. ..h* - ..:..., .....Defendants.

¶11

oA.8s6/2023

¶12

¶13

M/s. Alluri Krishnam^Raju. Counsel for^APPlicant Defendants No representation.

¶14

:: ORDER^::

¶15

The Applicant^Bank filed^{the present OA for the recovery of a} sum of Rs.1,12,81,563.74Ps^{jointly and severallyfrom the} defendants with future interest @13.40olo^{per annum with} monthly rests from 08.09.2023 till the^date of^{realisationalong} with costs.

¶16

The averments of applicant bank as^per the OA, briefly, are^that 1"t defendant is the borrower represented by 2nd defendant Proprietor. Defendants availed a total loan facility of Rs.96 lakhs to meet the working capital and other financial requirements by executing the requisite loan documents dated 23.10.2018. The stocks and book debts of the 1st defendant have been hypothecated as a security towards the loans. Thereafter, defendants availed WTCL under GECL and cash credit limit renewal on 07.07.2020 duly executing the necessary documents. Due to default in repayment of loan amounts, defendants' loan account was classified as NPA on 28.04.2023 and thereafter recall notice dated 28.04.2023. Since defendants failed to clear the dues, the present OA is flled for recovery of the same.

¶17

Though defendants entered appearance through Counsel, Mr, Swami Bandamidi, they did not choose to file written statement, adduce evidence or advance arquments. rfus;',

¶18

oA.8s6l2023

¶19

Accordingly, their respective rights to file written statement, adduce evidence and advance arguments were forfeited.

¶20

Applicant Bank examined E. Amit Kumar, Senior Manager as AW-1 and marked 26 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.26.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant prayed that orders may be passed on records. perused the material brought on record,

¶22

6, Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that defendants did not pursue the n.latter right from the stage of filing written statement till the stage of arguments. Therefore, applicant bank is entitled to the OA claim in view of evidence affldavit of AW.1 coupled with recitals in Exhibits A.1 to 4.26. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed for allowing the OA claim in favour of the applicant bank and against the defendants.

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants?

¶25

B. As stated supra, defendants have not pursued the case except entering appearance through c<;unsel. Under such circumstances, the Evidence Affidavit of AW.1 coupled with the recitals in documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.26 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank remains unchallenged and un-rebutted and thus clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I find that defendarrts 1 and 2 are joinUy ''v ftgsxrr

¶26

oA.a56lZO23

¶27

and severally are^{liable to pay the claim made by the APplicant} Bank in the O.A.^{with future interest and costs.}

¶28

In the result, the^{present Original APplicationNo,856/2023is} allowed as under:^-

¶29

i) defendants 1 and 2^{are jointlyand severally} liable to^pay a sum of^{Rs.1,12,81,563} '74Ps to the applicant bank with^{future interest} @8,85o/o^{per annum simplefrom the date of} application till the date^{of realization;}

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

LZ, Communicate a copy of this order to the^{partlesconcernedand} upload on offlcial Web Portal.

¶35

(Diotate-d to the steno, signed and pronounccd by me in the open court on this the²⁵⁶ day ofApril, 2025).

¶36

@$**s (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Overseas Bank v. v Mod Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. v Mod Enterprises

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S Irya Apparels

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus M/S Progressive Press Pvt. Ltd.

Axis Bank Ltd., versus Kamalamma Jetavath

Punjab National Bank versus Mr. Vemuri Ravi Kiran

Icici Bank Limited versus Momin Shaikshavali

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Satya Praveen Mobiles