Allowed

Union Bank of India (Formerly Andhra Bank) v. M/S S P Mines and Minerals

DRT21 Nov 2023OA/205/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery TribunalAllowed the original application filed by Union Bank of India. The court upheld the bank's claim for recovery of dues from the borrower defendants jointly and severally and authorized proceedings against the mortgaged property of the guarantor.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.78,65,938.15 with future interest from respondents 1 to 3; entitlement to proceed against mortgaged property of respondent 4; recovery of costs.

Union Bank of India (Formerly Andhra Bank) versus M/S S P… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

,.ORIGINAT'

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-]I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEI\4BER, 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons,), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINALAPPLICATION No. 2O5 OF ZOZ2

¶5

Union Bank of India (Formerly Andhra Ban k) 10-3-316/2, Masab Tank Asif Nagar, H ydera bad - 500028 Rep. by Authorised OfFicer. ....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

lvl/s. S.P. Mines & Minerals Rep. by its Partners Mr. Pasunuru Prudvi Naidu Mr. Moru Satish H. No. t-4-272/2, Ptot No.32 Maruthinagar East Kothapet, Hyderabad-500035.

¶8

Mr. Pasunuru Prudvi Naidu S/o P. Ravi Kumar Naidu Aged: 29 years, Occ: Business H. No. 1-5-907. Maruthi Nagar Near lain Mandir, Kothapet Hyderabad-500060.

¶9

Mr. Moru Satish, S/o Moru Eshwar Aged: 30 years, Occ: Business H. No. L-4-272/2, Road No.7, Maturhinagar East, Kothapet, Hyderabad-500035. f,#

¶10

oa.2o5l2022

¶11

¶12

Moru Pushpa W/o Late Moru Eshwar Aged:49^years, Occ:^Business H. No. 7-4-272/2,^{Road No.7,} Maruthinaga r East, KothaPet, Hyderabad-500035. ... Defendants.

¶13

: Ms. Tarangini Pisipati. Counsel for Applicant Counsel for Defendants^{1 & 2: Mr. B. Sanjay} Kumar. Defendants3&4 :Exparte.

¶14

:: ORDER ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank^flled the^{present OA u/s 19 of the Recovery} of Debts and Bankruptcy Act,^{1993 for recovery of a sum of} Rs.78,65,938.15Ps from the^defendants 1to^{3 with interest} @12.90o/o^{p.a. with monthly rests frcm07.04.2022till the date} of reallsation along with costs and sale^{of OA scheduleproperty} belonglng to 4th defendant.

¶16

The averments of applicant bank as^per the OA, briefly,^{are that} 1st defendant, represented by its^partners defendants² and^3, availed credit facilities. The 4th defendant offered her^property as a collateral security to the loan. All the defendants executed loan documents lncluding demand^promissory note. However, defendants defaulted in repayment despite demand notice u/s 13(2) dated 09.04.2027. Hence this Application.

¶17

Defendants 3 and 4 were set exparte on 11.08.2022 as called absent and no representation despite service of notice. Right of Defendants l and 2 to file written statement forfeited as they failed to do so in spite of granting several opportunities. OKn'

¶18

¶19

oA.2O5l2022

¶20

Applicant Bank examined^pramod Singodia, Senior Manager as AW-1 and marked 19 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.19.

¶21

Right of adducing evidence of defendants 1 and 2 forfeited on 17.08.2023 after affording. several opportunities.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the applicant. Defendants arguments forfeited as they failed to advance arguments even after taking time. Perused the material placed on record.

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entided for the OA claim against the Defendants and OA schedule property as prayed for?

¶25

According to applicant bank, 1st defendant firm being the borrower represented by lts partners defendants 2 and 3 and 4th defendant being the g ua ra ntor/mortgagor, failed to repay the loan as agreed. Since the defendants failed to file written statement, adduce evidence and advance oral or written arguments, the OA clalm through recitals of Exs.Al to A.19 marked by AW.1 is proved in favour of the applicant bank and against the defendants. Accordingly, learned counsel prayed for recovery of outstanding dues from 1 to 3 jointly and severally and for sale of OA schedule property belonging to 4th defendant.

¶26

As stated supra, contesting defendants did not choose to file either written statement, adduce evidence or advance d'%"

¶27

oA-2O512022

¶28

¶29

arguments^{contradicting the averments brought out in the OA'} Under such^{circumstances the EvidenceAffidavit coupled with the} recitals in^{documents viz, ExsA lto A"l9 marked on behalfof the} Applicant^{Bank, clinches the claimof the Applicant Bankagainst the} defendants^{1 to 3 jointly and severallyand against4rh defendantto the} extent of security^{offered by her' Hence the defendants1 to 3 iointly and} severally^{and4th defendant to the extentof security offeredby her' are} tiable to^{pay theOA claim to the applicant bank with future interest and} costs.

¶30

In the^{result,the present Original Application No'205/2022is} allowed as^{under: -}

¶31

Defendants 1^{to 3 are jointlyand severally}

¶32

i) unO-+6' a"f"nO"nt^{to the extent of collateral} Iecuritv offereo by^{her liable to pay to the} aooti.unt Bank a sum^{of Rs.78,65,938'15Ps} *iin iuture interest^{@10 85o/o p'a simple} iro, tn" date^{of application till the dateof} realization;

¶33

ii) the loan is^{secured by way of mortgageof} orooertv described^{in the scheduleannexed} [o if," On and the^{applicant bank is entitled} to^{proceed againstthe same to realise its} dues;

¶34

iii) the applicant^{bank is entitled to proceed} aoalnst ttre^{person and properties of} d6fendants I to^{3 for realizationof lts dues;} and

¶35

iv) the applicant^{bank is entltledfor the costs'}

¶36

The^{ApPlicant Bankis directed to flte Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date^{of recerpt of this order.} /Yr*

¶37

oA.2O5l2022

¶38

L2. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictasd. to th^e steno. signed and pronounced by me in tile open court on this the 2l'' day of November.2023..1

¶40

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India (Formerly Andhra Bank) v. M/S S P Mines and Minerals

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (Formerly Andhra Bank) v. M/S S P Mines and Minerals

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Marx Alexander

Sulaiman K T versus The Manjeri Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Dhairjya Ram Deka

Mrs G K Rani versus State Bank of India

Ms Habib Oil and Grains Processing versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S Mahavir Jain Enterprises