Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Siri Enterprises

DRT7 Mar 2023OA/203/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of Rs.82,07,077.01 plus future interest and costs from the defendants. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable and upheld the bank's security interest over scheduled properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.82,07,077.01 with future interest; OA claim secured by hypothecated/mortgaged properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Siri Enterprises — DRT (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE 7THDAYOF MARCH,2023}

¶2

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

¶3

oA, NO. 203^{0F 2022}

¶4

Union Bank^{of India} (e-Andhra Bank) S.R. Naga^{r Branch} S.R. Nagar Hyderabad- 502^038. Rep. by its^{Asst. General Manager'}

¶5

.. .Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Siri EnterPrises Prop: Mr. Singuluri^{Nageswara Rao} S/o Brahmanandam,^{Aged:58 Years} #48-47 /7 /5,^{PaPaiahYadavNagar} Near Rainbow^{Model School} Balanagar,^{Hyderabad-500 037.}

¶8

Also at:

¶9

M/s. Siri EnterPrlses Prop: Mr. S.^NageswaraRao S/o Brahmanandam,^{Aged: 58} Years PIot Nos. 1A,^{19, 26, 27,} Sy. Nos. 244 &^{316, Subhash Nagar} IDA, Jeedimetla,^{RangaReddy - 500055.}

¶10

Mrs. Singulu ri Subba^Lakshmi W/o S. Nageswara^Rao Aged 49^{years, #48-47} /7 /5 Papaia h Yadav^Nagar Near Ralnbow Model^School Balanagar, Hyderabad-500^037. ...Defendants

¶11

oA.2O3l2022

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant Defendants

¶13

: Mr. Srinivasa Rao Chakrala : Exparte

¶14

:: oRDER;:

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.82,07,077.01ps with future interest @13.95% p.a. with monthry rest joinfly and severaily from the defendants from 01.04,2021 till the date of realisation along with costs, and for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶16

The defendants served with summons. They were set exparte on 72.09.2022 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined G. Kondal, Asst. Manager, as AW_ l and marked 46 documents through her as Ex. A. 1 to Ex. 4.46.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the

¶19

written arguments and the material placed on record.

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶21

Whether the Appticant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and the OA schedule properties?

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupred with the recitars in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to 4.46 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable ffi*

¶23

oA.2O3l2O22

¶24

¶25

to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶26

In the result, the present Original Application No.203/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶27

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.82,07,077.01Ps with future interest @11.600/o^p.a. simple from the date^of application till the date of realization;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/mortgage of properties described in the schedules 'A' and 'B' annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 7'r day of March,2023) .

¶34

frV<^"> (--,/ 4'2 (MMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Siri Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Siri 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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Tirumalesh Pasuvula Dana and Processing Unit

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Vinayaka Filling Station

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus M/s Laxmi Music Centre and Others

Meenu Kalia versus Bank of Maharashtra

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Ms Nine Projects

Bank of Baroda versus Asyuraju