Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sri Ammapalli Gurunatham

DRT25 Jul 2024OA/200/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ATOR allowed an application by the Karur Vysya Bank for recovery of a housing loan default. The bank obtained a decree against the borrowers and guarantor for the principal amount, future interest at 11%, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Bank ordered to recover Rs.41,56,689.01, future interest at 11%, and costs; entitled to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties; recovery certificate issued.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Sri Ammapalli Gurunatham — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 2STHDAY OF JIJLY' 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.2OO ol 2023

¶4

Between :

¶5

The KarurVysya Bank Ltd, Asset Recovery Branch. D.No.,5-B-356 to 362. 3'o floor, Chiraq Ali Lane Abids, HyderaO"aO.^---' Represented by its authorized stgnatory/ Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri AmmapalliGurunatham, :/9^{LareAnandaChetty,} aged major, R/ o 6/ 48, BajannaGudi street, fenugunta^{road, Tiruchanur,} rrrupathi - 517 501.

¶9

SmtAmmapalliGajalakshmi, w/o AmmapalliGurunatham, 399_O^{malor, remate, R/o 6/48,} ua.lannaGudi street.

¶10

fenugunta^{road, Tiiuchanur,} trrupathi - 517 501.

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the parties:

¶13

For the Applicant

¶14

;;,;;,,

¶15

S.A.V. Ratnam
rte
ti!, z5lrrrm ..
lii4 T
\ .jJ .. rr.
k*m#

¶16

(OA. No.200/2023 )

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.4l,56,6gg.O1ps (Rupees Forty One Lakhs Fifty Six thousand Six hundred Eighty Eight and paise one only) with future interest @ 14% p.a (11olo + 3yo penal interest) with monthry rests from date of apprication tiI the date of realization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged immovabre properties as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 availed a sum of Rs.19,79,360/_ housing loan facility to purchase the schedure mentioned properties vide sanction retter dated 09.12.2013 and also availed a sum of Rs.14,89,360/_. Defendant no.2 is the wife of defendant no.1 who stood as guarantor for the said facirities. The defendant no.1 created mortgage of schedure mentioned properties and executed agreement/ undertaking to create equitable mortgage, term loan agreement for housing finance, retter of decraration and demand promissory note etc. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the account as *oo;/'iffiqf$(Srro issued demand notice dated t4.07.2014. ffioitu & rJs},,.reguests and demands, the defendants did,cot .,?"S,lfii"lbli..;:,\ Hence this oA.

¶20

¶21

(oA. No.200/2023)

¶22

3' Defendants No.1 and 2 cailed absent and set exparte on 04.0r.2024.

¶23

Sri P. Shiva Shankar, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.18.

¶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 cafled absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.Al to A.18. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitred to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶28

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶29

tly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant ,56,6gg.o1ps (Rupees Forty One Lakhs iitv sktrn[r[Jflfi r,i ndred Eighty Eight and paise one only) W***.W

¶30

(oA.N0.200/2023)

¶31

with future interest @ 11olop.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶33

Properties as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

10' The Appricant Bank is arso entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶35

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

¶36

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

14' communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribe corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on rhis the 2srhday , rr,rljJrXi.,

¶40

ff-"w "h)
; r:1 zsJrzoz{ T *
*g9

¶41

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶42

,Vfr,ry

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sri Ammapalli Gurunatham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Sri Ammapalli Gurunatham

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 Mr. Mouli Ravitla

State Bank of India versus M/S. Vow Interiors

State Bank of India versus Sri. Gattu Prabhakar Reddy

State Bank of India versus Mr. G. Devender

Bank of India versus Dr. Bheemagani Lakshmi Narayana

Jambula Ravi versus State Bank of India