Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Rajabhadraiah

DRT1 Aug 2023OA/32/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No.32 of 2023, the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I at Hyderabad heard the bank's original application for recovery of an outstanding loan principal with future interest and costs against absent defendants, allowing the claim based on evidence adduced by the bank.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to jointly and severally pay Rs. 21,56,036.48 with future interest and costs. Bank entitled to proceed against movable/immovable properties and defendants' persons/properties for r

Union Bank of India versus Rajabhadraiah — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.32 of 2023

¶4

Between :

¶5

Union Bank of India, Parkala branch, Parkala, Warangal. TS Represented by its Senior Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri Martha Rajabhadraiah, s/o Sri Rajaiah, aged 45 years, male, R/o H.No.20-585, Madharam, Parkala - 506 164, Warangal district.

¶9

Smt Martha Jyothi, w/o Sri Martha Rajabhadraiah, aged 40 years, female, R/o H.No.20-585, Madharam, Parkala - 506 164, Warangal district. Defendants

¶10

Counsel for the

¶11

For the Applicant Ba laj i For the Defendants.

¶12

(OA.No.3212023)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.21,56ro36.4gps (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Fifty Six thousand thirty six and paise forty eight only) with future interest @ 13.20olop.a with monthly rests from the date of application till realization and in default for sale of movable and immovable properties as described in the schedule '.item No.1 & 2" to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants initially availed vehicle loan for purchase of new car viz., Maruthi Ertiga SHVS ZDI BSIV Model with a limit of Rs.7,50,000/on 31.12.2016. The said facility was secured by hypothecation of car purchased. In 2018 the defendants availed term loan of Rs.15.00 lakhs against mortgage of house property belonging to defendant no.2. The defendant no.2 created mortgage by deposit of title deeds in respect of schedule property on 11.07.2018. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA and issued demand notice dated 21.09.2021. Inspite of seueral requests and demands, the the outstanding. Hence th is OA.

¶16

(oA.No.32l2023)

¶17

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 16.05.2023.

¶18

Sri T. Siva Kumar, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.10.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶20

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶21

The defendants were called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.10. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶22

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

¶23

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a totat Rs.zl,s,pf36.4sps (ff$Fis Twenty One Lakhs Fifty Six thousand,fffiy six arid paisBr\ty eight only) with j* o 1 Ariri ?on :li

¶24

.^r_t Ws'#

¶25

(OA.No.32l2023)

¶26

future interest @ 13.20olop.a from the date of application till the date of rea lization.

¶27

i) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the movable and immovable propefties as described in the schedule "item no.1 & 2" to OA towards realization of its dues.

¶28

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

¶29

iii) The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶30

iv) The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶31

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1st day of Aug, 2023)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFIICER

,:;r'rr, r,

Union Bank of India v. Rajabhadraiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Rajabhadraiah

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

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sri Krishna Extrusion Technics

Union Bank of India versus Shri Vadla Jaya Prakash

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ms Multi Level Rehab Co.

Bank of India versus Shashi Pet Industries

State Bank of India versus Sri Nallathigala Surender

M/S. Uco Bank, versus M/S. Bhagya Laxmi Enterprises