Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Padmavathi Traders

DRT13 Jul 2023OA/715/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India against three respondents. The court found the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed sum with future interest and costs based on examined evidence, as the respondents were present ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.32,25,791.55p with future [email protected]% p.a., mortgage secured, recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Padmavathi Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE, B.Com.,L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No: 715 OF²⁰²²

¶4

Union Bank of lndia Bowenpally Branch, Plot No.08, Krishna Reddy Colony, New Bowenpally, Secunderabad, Hyderabad-500011. Rep by its Chief l.4anager.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.M/s.Padmavathi Traders RepbyitsPartner Sri.RamuPulaparthi S/oRamalingayya Ageabout 35^years, Occ:Business, H.No,8-2-277131,Plot No.31, 1"tfloor,UBIColony,Road No.3, Banjarahills,Near TOSRestaurant, Hyderabad-500034.
2.Suram Srinivas Proprietor of M/sPadmavathiTraders RepbyitsPartnerSriSuram Srinivas S/oLateSuramSathaiah, AgeMajor, Occ:Business, H.No,8-2-277/37,Plot No.31, 1stfloor,UBIColony,Road No.3, Banjarahills,Near TOSRestaurant, Hyderabad-500034.
3.Sri.RamuPulaparthi S/oRamalingayya,f)**_.--_ C,/-_fj,3-^,

¶8

oa.775/2022

¶9

il-""lBi'-t'rt rrrT ^; f^{.^:.:f ,, "} it:t#i [?;iilt,]i.3;,,

¶10

Sri Suram Srinivas S/o Late Suram Sathaiah Age Major, Occ: Busina<" H.,No.8-2-277 /3L, pfot f,toi: r . iit|i#i;,i"j:i.fi""l,]i;t;,,

¶11

,..Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant Defendants

¶13

:Ms. O.Sangeetha Jaiswal

¶14

; Exparte

¶15

:: oRDER::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed th( the derendants,",,,,,^{='j,"i"",11":IJt"} :"":il t'"; Rs.32,25,791.55ps with future interest @ 9.4o/o p.a. with 2o/o penar interest with monthry rests from o4.o8.2022ti, the date of realisation along with costs, and in default, for sale of OA schedule property.

¶17

The Summons served on D1 to 4 through paper publication.

¶18

They were set exparte on 08.05.2023 as called absent and no

¶19

representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined N.Srinivasulu, Authorised Officer,

¶21

as AW-1 and marked 18 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex, A.18. Ary*

¶22

¶23

oA.77512022

¶24

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

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.18 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶28

In the result, the present Original Application No.7l5/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶29

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.32,25,791.55ps with future interest @ 8.70olo p.a simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of propefty described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to rearise its debt; dW*

¶31

¶32

oA.7Ls/2022

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of July,2O23l.

¶38

(RAMESHVVAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Padmavathi Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Padmavathi Traders

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

Bishnu Priya Panda versus Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s Mahfuz Construction and Others

Hdfc Bank versus M/s Jaiswal Enterprises and Others

Shafi Adattil versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Idbi Bank versus M/s Maa Vindhyavashini Industries and others

Uco Bank versus M/s V1 Veriety Mall and Others