Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. National Agencies

DRT17 Apr 2023OA/245/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No. 245 of 2022, the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, allowed the application filed by City Union Bank Ltd. to recover Rs. 75,79,475/- jointly and severally from the defendants, with future interest and costs, following their default in appearance.

What did the court decide?

Declaratory that defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 75,79,475/- with interest secured by mortgage property; issue recovery certificate.

City Union Bank Limited versus National Agencies — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL']IAT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE 17th DAY OF APRIL,2023}

¶2

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

¶3

oA. NO. 245^{0F 2022}

¶4

City Union^{BankLtd .} Nandyal Branch Nandyal, Kurnool^Dist. Rep. by its Branch^Manager.

¶5

. . ..Appllcant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. National^Agencies ReP. bY its^ProP: Mr. Nasyam Mohammed^zaheer Occ: Business D. Ho.51/15/57A Auto Nagar, Na^ndyal Kurnool District,^A.P. 2. lti/s. Nasyam Mohammed^zaheer S/o Sri Mohammed^{lamal Saheb} Age: 46 Years,^{Occ: Business} R/o H. No. 2-256,^{Nasyam Street} Opp: Andhra^{Bank, Byrmal Street} Nandyal, Kurnool Dist.^A.P. 3. Mrs. Nasyam Naseera^Parveen W/o M/s. Nasyam Mohammed^Zaheer Age: 34^years, Occ:^Business R/o H. No.2-256, Nasyam^Street Opp: Andhra^{Bank, BYrmalStreet} .. . Defendants' Nandyal, Kurnool Dist. A.P. Counsel for the Applicant^{: Mr. Trivikram Chitturu'} Counsel for Defendants^{: ExOarle.} 77fug/:tf Lv

¶8

¶9

oA,24512022

¶10

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.75,79,475/_ i.e., Rs.6g,34,420/_ towards cc account and Rs.6,45,055/- towards OSL Speciat account jojnfly and severally from the Defendants with future inte.e.t 6116.56o7o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of the Application till the date of realisation along with costs and sale of OA schedule property.

¶11

The defendants served summons through paper publication.

¶12

They were set ex-parte on 05.09.2O22 as called absent and no

¶13

representation.

¶14

The Applicant Bank examined G.V.K. Sridhar, Branch Manager,

¶15

as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to

¶16

Ex. A. 12.

¶17

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

¶18

material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consjderation is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA sciedule property as prayed for?

¶21

As stated supra, the defendants remained exparte. Under these circumstances, the Evidence Affidavit coupred with the recitars in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank proves the claim of the Applicant Bank againsr

¶22

z1'r*,/ ^+, /(,/'^{..^:r'} l-/

¶23

oA.24512022

¶24

¶25

the Defendants.^{Hence, I hold} that the Defendants^{are jointlY} and severally^{liable to} PaY^the OA claim to the^{APPlicantBank} with future interest^{and costs.}

¶26

In the result, the^{presentC.A.24512022 is allowed as under: -}

¶27

i) the Defendants^{are jointlyand severally liable to} pay a sum of Rs.75,79,4751-^{i.e., Rs.69,34,4201-} towards CC account^{and Rs.6,45,055/- towards} OSL Special account^{to the Applicant Bank with} future interest @12olo^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till^{the date of realization;}

¶28

ii) the OA claim is^{securedby way of mortgageof} property described in^{the schedule annexedto the} OA and the applicant^{bank is entitledto proceed} against the same^{for realisation of its debt;}

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 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 andpronouncedbyme in the open court on} this the 17rh^{day of APril, 2023).}

¶34

Ow*

¶35

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

City Union Bank Limited v. National Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. National Agencies

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

United Bank of India versus M S Icon J J Beverages Pvt. Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Lalit Chimney

Uco Bank versus Gangadhar Choudhary

Punjab National Bank versus Praveen Kumar and another

Punjab National Bank versus Pratik Kumar

Birendra Pratap Singh versus Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank