Allowed

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. K.Syamalamma

DRT28 Aug 2023OA/982/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an exercise of jurisdiction under the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the court allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues from two defendants. The defendants appeared ex parte. The court held the evidence and documents substantiated the claim and ordered the defendants to jointly and severally pay the sum with interest, costs, and secured by mortgage assets.

What did the court decide?

Awarded recovery of total sum of Rs. 1,00,84,064.00 paid under AGTL-I and AGTL-II accounts with future interest and costs against OA schedule assets and other properties.

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) versus K.Syamalamma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF AUGUST, 2023 PRESENT: sH. RAMESHWAR KI L' LB. (Hons. ), M.A. ,*.rroril'ot;ot'..J[.,

¶2

Original Application No: gB2 OF 2022

¶3

Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Beluguppa Branch D.No. 1/39 to 1/41, Main Road. Beluguppa, Ananthapur Districi_515741. Rep. by its Authorised Omcer.

¶4

....Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

K. Syamalamma, ryo. K. Venkata Naidu. l9?d!.7t^{years,occ: iuttivation,} R/o. Thagguparthy Villaqe. Ananthapur District.

¶7

K. Praveen Kumar, S/o. K. Venkata Naidu, 19ed:.41^{years, Occ: Cuttivation,} R/o. Thagguparthy Village, tsetuguppa Mandal, Ananthapur District.

¶8

...Defendants

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant M/s V. Oyumani Defendants Expartelry$

¶10

oA.NO.982/2022

¶11

::^qLLER::

¶12

The Applicant^{Bankfiled the present OA for} the recovery of a a sum of Rs.

¶13

total sum of Rs.^{1,00,84,064.00psi e'} 58,11,826.00ps^{under AGTL-I accountand Rs 42,72,23A'OOps} under AGTL-II^{account respectivelyfromthe defendantsjointly} and severally^{with future interest @ l!.45o/op'a' with monthly} rests from the^{date of application till the date of realisation} along with costs^{and in defaultfor sale of OA schedule assets}

¶14

Summons^{servedon D1 and 2. They were set exparte on} 16.03.2023 as called^{absent and no representation'}

¶15

The Applicant Bank^{examined N. Nagaraiu, Senior Manager,as} AW-1 and marked^{26 documents through her as Ex' A 1 to Ex'} a.26.

¶16

4, Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bankand perused the} material^{placed on record}

¶17

The^point that arises^{for considerationis:-}

¶18

whether the Applicant Bank^{is entitled} for the claim made in the^{OA against} the Defendants and OA^schedule assets?

¶19

As stated supra, the^{Defendantsremainedex-parte.The} Evidence Affidavit coupled^with the^{recitals in the documents} viz., Exs. A.1 to A.26 marked on behalf^{of the ApplicantBank} clinches the claim of the Applicant^{Bankagainst the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants^{are jointly and severallyllable} to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant^{Bankwith future interest} and costs. Ary<..> -/^-5B',

¶20

oA.NO.982/2022

¶21

Jn the result. the prer sent original Application No.g82/2o22 is a owed as under: _

¶22

i) The Defen ,,u0,",o o"i"J',r,I#H ":1^{j::f :;} ii;rr1.o,o;L:tt'oo,s^{i'e u} ".,^{o' ]'} under AGTL-I account and ^r.^or,rr,)ro" .u,r".,,,",, l1,lol1,::i::":::. ; :::#i :;:.:::::.j:il,:;,^{"or app,ica,ion,i,,}

¶23

ii) n'ootnutut'oi'I the OA cti.^{is secured bY wa, of} rtgage of assets described

¶24

in tt,u ,at"a,a unn"'uo to the oA and the

¶25

applicant oun''" proceed aeainst

¶26

the same., ;l,:,""[t::l,t:

¶27

iii) the appticant bank is also entitled to proceed

¶28

against the ,u*o, and properties of

¶29

defendants ro, lization of its dues;

¶30

iv) the appricant L is enti'ed for the costs.

¶31

The Appricant eant is airer'| Memo ,l,/ithin 2 weeks

¶32

rrom the date or receipt;..f,',.til:*"

¶33

¶34

10'd.{'3$[i:]";#IJi.:lt1""J:,7;:,*J,"f : Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

i."i""il!".ilil;,.",

¶36

(MMESHWAR KOTHF} PRESIDTNG orrrCen-

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. K.Syamalamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (e-Corporation Bank) v. K.Syamalamma

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

Punjab National Bank versus Maa Fly- Ash Bricks Industries and Others

Canara Bank versus M/s Vishwa Faishon And General Store and Others

Shreejan Cold Storage Private Limited versus Uco Bank

Sh Samarth Singh Hooda versus State Bank of India

Punjab National Bank versus Manoj Kumar Singh and others

Hdfc Bank versus P Veera Brahmaiah