Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mr Rambabu Kasaraboina

DRT9 Nov 2023OA/52/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Un ion Bank India for recovery of Rs. 42,39,594.13 with future interest. The Court held that the bank established its claim through evidence and entitled itself to realization from the mortgaged property and personal assets of the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs. 42,39,594.13 with future interest @9.65% p.a., costs, and recovery certificate; authority to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Mr Rambabu Kasaraboina — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE gTH DAY OF NOVEMBER' 2023

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.52 of 2023

¶3

Between :

¶4

Union Bank of India, Palvancha Branch, palvancha, Bhadradri, Kothagudem dist, Telangana State Represented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. Mr. Rambabu Kasaraboina s/o K. Venkataiah, aged about l1^{v::.:l mate,occ: govtemptoyee} R/o Qtr,No.BF-433, I colony, kTeS, :?tyun:!1,^{Bhadradri,Kothasudem} lJist - 507 115, Telangana State.

¶8

Mrs. _^{Nagamani Kasaraboina,} w/o Rambabu Kasaraboina, aged about 48 years, female,

¶9

9::;_i",^{known, R/o err No.BF_433,} i colony, KTpS, palvancha, Bhadrad ri, Kothaqudem Dist - 507 115, Tllangana State.

¶10

Mr. Manu Boda, S/o Bhagna,
fln-:9 ib."rl ,ajor, occ: not known,
I_11"t R{o etr No.SG_8, a- cotony, kres
l?lyun:!1 Bhadradri, kothasudem
dants
Drst - 507 115, Telangana State. ffi:<br>A
-, ,-, r 0 g l]0l/ ,nr .
rl1 .L
%"-'ry

¶11

(oA. No.s2l2023)

¶12

Counsel for the^pa rties:

For the Applicant

For the Defenda nts

Sri MVS Prasad

Expa rte

ORDER

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.42,3g,5g4l_ (Rupees Forty Two lakhs Thirty Eight thousand Five hundred Eighty four only) with future interest @ 9.65olo p.a from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale oF mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendants No.1 & 2 avaired term roan of Rs.50.00 rakhs for purchase of OA schedule mentioned property on 01.05.2016. Defendant no'3 stood as guarantor to the roan avaired by defendants 1 & 2. The defendants executed composite agreement, memorandum of deposit of titre deeds and created equitabre mortgage of schedure mentioned property. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to nt as NPA on L9.O2.2OZI and issued /:t-"EY-'\ n o ''r,! n):) '* i,J

¶20

(oA.No.s2l2023)

¶21

demand notice dated 01.10.2022. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶22

Defendants 1 to 3 called absent and set exparte on 09.06.2023.

¶23

Shri K.N. Srikanth, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.B.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

Defendants called absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.B. 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 Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and

¶28

costs.

¶29

B, In the res u lt,
with costs, as u nd er:
ffi&'
B nsNrvrtn
Qr**9

¶30

(oA.No.s2l2023)

¶31

The Defendants are jointry and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.42,3g,5g4l- (Rupees Forty Two lakhs Thirty Eight thousand Five hundred Eighty four only) with future interest @ 9,650lo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶33

the Applicant Bank is also entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

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

¶35

The Applicant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accord ing ly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of Nov, 2023)

¶39

sd/-

¶40

(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
,;RyE coPY
,/J- U-..- - 4-t
o11,, /a' ,-1
,tsst Psgrstrrr []t 9
C.?i'-.r. r.:i:'i;.-.i !!/.5_ ,/

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mr Rambabu Kasaraboina

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mr Rambabu Kasaraboina

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 Mohd Kamar a Alam

Union Bank of India versus Madhamchetty Anil Kumar

State Bank of India versus Sri Dontheboina Nageswara Rao

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Star Industries

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sri Rama Transport

State Bank of India versus Sri Shesharao Rathod