Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Rohit Kumar

DRT16 Aug 2023OA/377/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an Order of Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 27,77,027 along with interest and costs against three defendants, holding that the bank established its claim through documentary evidence and was entitled to realize dues from mortgaged property and against persons/properties of defendants.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.27,77,027 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' properties; awarded costs of the OA.

Union Bank of India versus Rohit Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST'2023

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA.No.377 of 2022

¶4

Between :

¶5

Union Bank of India, Masab tank branch, Hyderabad, Telangana. Represented by its Chief Manager Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1, Mr. Rudrashetty Rohit Kumar, S/o Sri Shiva Shankar, aged 30 years Occ: business, R/o H.no.10 _3-282/8, Salma villa, Humayun nagar, Hyderabad.

¶8

Mr. Rudrashetty Shiva Shankar, S/o Sri R. Ramalingam, aged about 57 years, occ: buslness, R/o H.No.10-3-282/8, Salma villa, Humayun nagar, Hyderabad.

¶9

Mr.Jagadish Kumar Sanka, s/o,S. Veerappa, aged about 42 years, male, occ: business, R/o12_1_33'U6O_-__. as' Dda tta t re'a#; iH ;:l rtfi #ilti,Xv

¶10

Defenda nts
,-j' .w, +N
; | 6 rue zra ;ii
lr^,. .,8o.Vii
',Q.f;--"

¶11

(oA.377 /2022)

¶12

Counsel for the pa rties:

¶13

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶14

Sri PBA Srinivasan Exparte

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.27,77,O27l_ (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Seventy Seven thousand and Twenty Seven only) with interest @ 10.25olo p.a (includin g 2o/op.a penal interest) from 79.1,7.2022 till realization and in default for sale of mortgaged immovable property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶17

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants 1 & 2 avaired Rs' 30.00 rakhs housing roan facirity for purchase of residentiar frat more particurarry described in schedure to OA vide sanction letter dated 22.02.2014, The defendants executed a composite agreement in favour of applicant bank undertaking to repay the loan in 240 EMIs along with interest @ 10.25olo p.a. Defendants 2 & 3 executed the said document as co_obligants to repay the loan lh", tu'rt/{q..iIv, tf,e defendants faited to comply the the applicant bank was n 15.08.2021 and issued

¶18

loA.377l2O22l

¶19

possession notice dated 29,04.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶20

Defendants were called absent and set exparte on 08.03.2023.

¶21

Shri M. Abhimanyu, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined

¶22

himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked

¶23

as Ex.A.1 to A.6.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

The point that aris.e for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶26

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

¶27

prayed for?

¶28

7' The defendants were cared absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1 who is the official of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to 4.6. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶29

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

¶30

.r, .r
--
'1 ? Aiiq ",J-1 - i!
i ." .-, ii#
::,'':. .,:.i:.i'.,/
i,-,:;{..:- i tt,l; i-1*', .,.,,J.1!/
'!ov,J,;,",'
"'"'
---
I'

¶31

(oA.377 /2022l,

¶32

The Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total Rs.27,77,OZZ/_ (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Seventy Seven thousand and Twenty Seven only) with interest @ 8.25olo p.a from 1,9.t7.2022 till the date of realization.

¶33

i) The Appricant bank is entitred to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedure to oA towards rearization of its dues.

¶34

ii) the Appricant Bank is arso entired to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned,

¶39

(Dictated to the p.A., transcrlbed by h^er, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 16th day of Aug, 2023)

¶40

sd/-

¶41

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶42

¶43

TRIIS PUIY
,...l*rmy

Union Bank of India v. Rohit Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Rohit Kumar

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 Smt. Anishetty Hymavathi

Union Bank of India versus M S Rohit Electronics and Home Appilances

Manne Narsimulu versus Canara Bank

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/S . Trr Agencies

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ms Abi Industry

State Bank of India versus Sri Potta Bhikshapathi