Allowed

Union Bank of India, v. Smt. Karanam Ramulamma

DRT13 Oct 2023OA/217/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of principal and interest on a Kisan Credit Card overdraft. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable and entitled the bank to realize the debt through mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay Rs. 29,64,373 with interest @ 8.50% p.a. and proceeding against mortgaged properties.

Union Bank of India, versus Smt. Karanam Ramulamma — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER OA.No.2t7 of 2022

¶3

Between:

¶4

Union Bank of India, Mominpet bra nch, Vikarabad district - 501 141. Telangana State Represented by its Branch Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Smt Karanam Ramulamma, 1t/o,{rl1n1aiah^{(tare) ased major,} R/o H.No.1-1. Kolkunda Mominpet mandat, vi[#ouO District - SOI 202, Telangana. 2. M,r. Karanam Laxmi Narayana, s/o Kri-shnaiah (late) aged major, R/o H.No.1-1, Kolkunda. Mominpet mandal, Vikarabad Drstrict - 5Ol 202, Telangana.

¶8

Defendants

¶9

Counsel for the pa rties:

¶10

Sri P. Suresh
Exparte
":H!"i.'i"16ry\li*
il* ,rocT2m :
iiu | .
i'{l )
$q" -i,f,gj
\S;xYltY

¶11

loA.No.277l2022)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.29,64,373/_ (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty four thousand Three hundred and seventy three only) with current and future interest @ 8.50o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of apprication ti, the date of rearization and in defaurt for sale of mortgaged properties as described in the schedule ,,1 to 6,, to OA.

¶14

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant No' 1 arong with defendant no.2 who is co-borrower avaired Kisan credit card roan (crop roan) a rimit of Rs.3,00 rakhs. Defendant no.1 executed memorandum of deposit of tifle deeds, mortgaged six agricultural properties more fully described in the schedure "1 to 6" in oA' The credit facirity avaired was enhanced from Rs.3.00 lakhs to Rs.7.00 lakhs on 26.0g.2OI4 and executed memorandum of deposit of tire deeds no.3g23/2074dated 26.0g.2014. The defendants avaired enhancement of credit facirity vide crop roan (KCC) of Rs,18,50,000/_ on 23.05.2018. To secure due repayment oF a m o u nt, th e defenda n:;&**t&ffiBn rrorissory note, com posite .r,-ir;-^ !L- , s eement .;; ;;##"ffi:T,-ffiT:: ilT"i a g r eement ana prop{fip rtut"r,ffit "t..'$*.. l;^{13onma ;lI} w;

¶15

loA.No.277 /21z2l

¶16

facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA and lssued regar notice dated 28.06.202L. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶17

Defendants 1 and 2 called absent and set exparte on 30.L2.2022.

¶18

4 Shri Rahul Das, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.13 (Except A. 12).

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶20

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶21

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as

¶22

prayed for?

¶23

7 ' Defendants called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Appricant Bank, AW'1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.13 (Except A.12). in view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrishecr their claim made in the oA "l,i,lil,.j!t,, Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to ,uo made in the OA with Future interest and costs_d

¶24

&i#

¶25

lOA.No.2!7 /2o2zl

¶26

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶27

q The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.29,64,373l_ (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty four thousand Three hundred and Seventy three only) with current and future interest @ 8.50o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization ;

¶28

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in the schedules ,,1 to 6,, to OA.

¶29

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶30

The Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.

¶31

The Appricant sha'fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶32

t4. Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶33

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the p.A., transcribed in the open :,i ".",i"Ui!ffi[Ji,?01"r'i '"""u0'^{srsned and pronounced bvme}

¶34

sd/-

¶35

(G. GOPtcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
I'RUE COPY
4
t)Fl-t, HYDE?4.F r' . '/
^"",ffit'i,

Union Bank of India, v. Smt. Karanam Ramulamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India, v. Smt. Karanam Ramulamma

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sri New Tech Readymix Concrete Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Sri Mohan Babu Chepuri

State Bank of India versus M/S. Flagsquare Infracon Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus M/S. Chetan Plastic Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri. Vaggu Chinna Vittal

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Saras Enterprises