Allowed

Uco Bank v. Mr.Kalakonda Murali Kumar (Also Lr of D2)

DRT23 Jan 2024OA/134/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows an Original Application filed by UCO Bank for recovery of a sum of Rs. 28,36,951/- along with interest against the Defendants. The court held the first defendant individually and the others as legal representatives of the deceased to be jointly and severally liable, directing the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Allowed OA for recovery of Rs. 28,36,951/- with interest and costs; declared defendants jointly and severally liable; directed issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Uco Bank versus Mr.Kalakonda Murali Kumar (Also Lr of D2) — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-IIAT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS^{THE 23.d DAY OF JANURARY,2024}

¶2

PRESENT: SH.^{RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM, L.L.B.(HONS.), M.A.}

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

oRIGrNal- 4IPIIGATI

¶5

UCO Ba nk, Bandlaguda Branch GSI Complex,^Bandlaguda, Nagole, H^yd ra ba^{d - 5 00068.} Rep by its Branch^Manager.

¶6

........Applica^nt.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Kalakonda^l'4 urali^Kumar (Also LR of D2) s/o. Late shri^K.Yadagiri Aged:about 30 Years H.No. 1-8-262,^{New MunicipalColony,} Dilsukhnagar, P&T Colony, Hyderabad-500060. (Amended as^per orders in I.A. No.3002/2023 dated^22.11.23)

¶9

Late Shri Kalakonda^Yadagiri S/o. Sri. K. Muttaiah Occupation :Farmer Aged about:65^years H.No. 1-8-262,^{New Municipal Colony,} Dilsukhnagar, P&T ColonY, Hyderabad- 500060. Rep by his Legal Heirs.

¶10

Mr. Kalakonda Hemanth^Kumar (LR of Defendant No.2) S/o. Late K.Yadaglri H.No. 1-8-262, New Municipal^Colony, Dilsukhnagar, P&T Colony, Hydera bad-500060.

¶11

|.4s. Kalakonda Hemawathi (LR of Defendant No.2)/X^-, Ax"'\

¶12

oa.t34/2023

¶13

D/o. Late Shri K.Yadagiri, H.No. 1-8-262, New Municipa I Colony, Dilsukhnagar,^p&T Colony, Hydera bad-500060.

¶14

Mrs. Kalakonda Sharada (LR of Defendant No.2) w/o. Late shri K.Yadagiri, Aged: 58 years,H.No. 1-8-262, New M un icipal Colony, Dilsukhnagar, P&T Colony, Hyderabad- 500060. (Amended as per orders in r.A. No.3002/2023 dated 22.11.23) Defendants. Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. P. S. Sujatha Defenda nts : Expa rte.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.28,36,951/- joinuy and severally from the defendant 1, and defendants 1,3 to 5 as LRS of 2"d defendant with lnterest @12.45olo per annum with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶17

Summons served on defendants 1, 3 and S. D1 was set exparte on 22.77.2023 and D3 to D5 were set ex-parte on 08.07.2024, as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined DSR Murthy, Senior Manager AS AW-1 and marked 9 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex.A.g. 7flirg.,-* (!/t"t''

¶19

oA.734/2023

¶20

¶21

Learned Counsel for the applicant bank reported orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶22

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants?

¶24

As stated supra, defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. 41 to A.9 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the defendant 1 individually and defendants 1, 3 to 5 as LRS of 2nd defendant to the extent of estate of deceased 2nd lying in their hands are jointly 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.13412023 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) the l't deFendant and defendants 1, 3 to 5 to the extent of estate of 2nd defendants lying in their hands are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. Rs. 28,36,95 1/- with future interest @ 10.45olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of^property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for recovery otxtau"t; rWe\

¶28

oA.L34l?,023

¶29

¶30

iii ) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the^person and^{properties of the1st} defendant and against defendants 1, 3 to⁵ to the extent of estate of 2nd defendant^lying in the hands of defendants 1, 3 to 5^for realization of its dues; and

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶32

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo^{within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶33

q Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23'd day of Ja nuary, 2024).

¶35

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Uco Bank v. Mr.Kalakonda Murali Kumar (Also Lr of D2)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Mr.Kalakonda Murali Kumar (Also Lr of D2)

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

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Bijender Kumar

Axis Bank versus M/S S. G. L. Traders

Ms Maniks salon and mangli kitchen rep by R Shiva Kumar versus Indusind Bank Limited

Dena Bank versus M/s Trident Tubes Limited.

Ms Sewa Enterprises versus Uco Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ravi Malik