Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Manjeera Mineral Water Pvt. Ltd.

DRT22 Dec 2022OA/306/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 36,95,434/- jointly and severally from the defendant bank branch and legal heirs of the deceased borrower, securing the claim against mortgaged assets. Recovery certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants held liable to pay Rs. 36,95,434/- with interest; OA claim secured by hypothecation/mortgage; bank entitled to proceed against properties and person of defendants; Recovery certificate issu

Union Bank of India versus Manjeera Mineral Water… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS^{THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER,2022}

¶2

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

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

oA. NO. 306^{0F 2022}

¶5

Union Bank^{of India} (FormerlY Andhra^Bank) lubilee Hills-2^Branch Hydera bad-5000³³ Rep. by its Assistant General^Manager.

¶6

...Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Majeera^{MineralWater Pvt' Ld'} Rep. by its Directors^{Mrs' Saba Kauser} Plot No.274,^{SwamYAYYaPPaSocietY} MadhaPur, HYderabad-500081'

¶9

Mrs. Saba Kauser W/o Late Mohd.^{Majeed Abdul} Aged : Major, Occ:^{Director of D-1}

¶10

Master Mohd, Abdul^Munif S/o Late Mohd'^{Majeed Abdul} Aged about 5 Years,^{under Care &} GuardianshiP of^{his natural} Mother Mrs. Saba^Kauser.

¶11

Master Mohd. Abdul^Mahib S/o Late Mohd. Majeed^Abdul Aged about 2 Years,^{under Care&} GuardianshiP of^{his natural} Mother Mrs. Saba^Kauser.

¶12

No.2 to 4 are R/o 6-19,^UPPerBazar Main Road, Sanga ReddY Telangana - 502 001.

dry'-

.. Defendants

oA.306l2022

Counsel^{for the APPlicant} Defendants

¶17

: Mr. V. Raghu :Exparte

¶18

:: ORDER^::

¶19

The Applicant^{Bank filed the presentOA for the recoveryof a total} sum of Rs.36,95,4341-^{(i.e., Rs'32,79,4851- under OCCA/c} No.0218131O0OOOOO7^{with interest @9'95o/o+ 2o/o -L1-'95olo p'a'} with monthly^{rests and Rs.4,15,949/-under TL A/c No'021830-} 100083745 with^{future interest @9'90% *2o/o =l!'90 p'a' with} monthly rests)^{jointlyand severallyfrom the defendantsfrom the} date of Application^{till the date of realisation along with costs' and} in default,^{for sale of OA schedule assets'}

¶20

The defendants^{2 to 4 served summonsthroughpaper publication'} SummonstoDlWerereturned'.unclaimed,,,hencedeemedtobe Served.AllthedefendantsWereSetexparteon0T,o9.2o22as called absent^{and no representatlon'}

¶21

1J. The Applicant^{Bank examined K' Ratnadeep' Manager' as AW-1and} marked 20^{documentsthrough him as Ex' A'1 to Ex' A'20'}

¶22

HeardtheLd.CounselfortheApplicantBankandperusedthe material Placed^{on record'}

¶23

¶24

The^point that^{arises for consideration is:-}

¶25

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitledfor} the ctaim^{made in the OA against the} Defendants^{and the OA schedule assets?}

¶26

oA.306/2022

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1to A.20 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. D 2, 3 and 4 are the legal heirs of late Mohd. Majeed Abdul and D3 and 4 are represented by D-2 being Guardian and natural mother. Hence, I hold that the Defendants 1 and 2 joinily and severally and defendants Z to 4 (D3 & D4 being legal heirs of late Mohd. Majeed Abdul being represented by their Guardian and natural mother D.2) to the extent of estate of late Mohd. Majeed Abdul, now lying in their hands, are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs

¶28

In the result, the present Original Application No.306/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶29

i) The Defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally and defendants 2 to 4 (D3 & D4 being legal heirs of late Mohd. Majeed Abdul being represented by their Guardian and natural mother D,2) to the extent of estate of late Mohd. Majeed Abdul, now lying in their hands are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.36,95,434/- (i.e., Rs.32,79,485/- under OCC A/c No. 021813100000007 and Rs.4,15,949/- under TL A/c No.0121830100083745 with future interest @11.45olo p.a. simple and @11.10o/o p.a. simple respectively from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/ mortgage of assets as described in the schedules A & B annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debli;2fuvL,L2"'t\Y'

¶31

oA.to6l2022

¶32

¶33

iii) the applicant bank is^{also entitled to proceedagainst} the properties D1 and against^{the person and} properties of D2 for realization of its dues;

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entitled^{for the costs.}

¶35

The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file CostMemo within 2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this Order.}

¶36

9, Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of this^{order to the parties concerned.} (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed^{and pronouncedbyme in the} open court on this the 22"d day^{of December, 2022).}

¶38

,,,'x--"w / / / -,'r*^- u7^'*'

¶39

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Manjeera Mineral Water Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Manjeera Mineral Water Pvt. Ltd.

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

Canara Bank versus Amol

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Gauri Laminates and Ors.

Punjab National Bank versus Allied High School and Anr.

State Bank of India versus Sh. Ramesh Kumar

Mrs. Sasikala Bala Chendil versus Punjab National Bank

Uco Bank versus Sri Venkata Lakshmi Sarees and Readymades