Allowed

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Machani @ Maddasani Jangaiah

DRT1 Sept 2023OA/548/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application seeking recovery of dues from defaulting borrowers. Holding the defendants jointly and severally liable based on submitted evidence, the court ordered payment of the principal sum, future interest, costs, and authority to realize debt through secured properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to jointly and severally pay the claimed sum with future interest and costs; bank authorized to proceed against properties and persons.

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) versus Machani @ Maddasani… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE lst DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.). M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No: S4B OF 2022

¶4

Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) SME Nacharam Branch H. No. 9-24,^plot No. 63, Street No.1, HMT Nagar, Nacharam, Hyderabad-5OOO76 Rep, by its Chief Manager.

¶5

.....Appticant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Machani @ Maddasani Jangaiah s/o. caldaiah, nged: 54 years-. # 3-137, Keesara Village. Keesara J,landal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana State_SOf SOfl

¶8

Mr_ Machani @ Maddasani Saradha, w/-o..Jangaiah, Aged: 53 years, # 3-137, Keesara Village, Keesara Mandal, Medachal_Malakajgiri District, Telangana State-S01301.

¶9

Mr. Ramdi Bal Reddy, S/o. Ram Reddy, # 2_36, K€esara Village, Keesara Mandal, lv|edchal-Mal kajgiri District, Telangana State-501301.

¶10

....Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Chakrala Srinivasa Rao Defenda nts : Exparte nl$*

oA.NO.548/2022

:; ORDER::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a total sum of Rs. S0,31,361.72ps as on 19.07.2022 i.e. Rs. 33,61,415.76ps from D-1 to D_3, Rs. 73,2g,872/_ from D1 and D2 and Rs. 3,4O,O73.96ps from D1 and D2 under House loan, under Agriculture Term Loan and under Crop loan respectively jointly and severally with future interest at contractual rate @ 72o/ot @ l0.7oo/o and @ 10.45% p.a. respectively till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶16

Summons served on D1 to 3. The defendants were set exparte

¶17

on 17.01.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Rohit pandey, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 33 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.33.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the material placed on record.

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entided for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties? l2in,

¶22

¶23

oa.No.s4812022

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.33 marked on behatf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No. 548/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 50,31,361.72ps i.e., D1 to D3 a sum of Rs. 33,61,415.76ps, D-l and D-2 a sum of Ps. L3,29,8721- and D1 and D2 a sum of Rs. 3,4O,O73.96ps under House loan, under Agriculture Term Loan and under Crop loan respectively with future interest @ 10.45olo simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of propedies described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to rdalise its debt .

¶28

,C{.\tt -

¶29

1-'/'<-o''Y

¶30

¶31

oA.NO.s48/2022

¶32

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

¶33

iv) the appltcant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, siSned and pronounced by me in the open court on thisthe 1't day of september,2023).

¶37

fu* (RAT4ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Machani @ Maddasani Jangaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Machani @ Maddasani Jangaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus Messers P B Enterprises

Bank of Baroda versus Paliwal Flour Mill Gruh Udyog

Hdfc Bank versus Ajay Kumar Tiwary

Smt Tripti Das And Ors. versus Bhangiya Gramin Vikas Bank

Vikash Kumar versus Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Sri Ganpati Food Industries and Others