Drts I at Hyderabad allowed an origination application seeking recovery of a housing loan. The tribunal held the applicant bank established its claim and directed joint and several payment of the principal amount with interest.
Respondents directed to pay Rs. 59,67,273 with interest @ 9.50% p.a.; recovery certificate issued.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL'2024
PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER OA.No.232 OF 2023
Between:
Bank of Maharashtra. SAIr4 branch, Bank street, Koti, Hyderabad, T.S. Represented by its authorized signatory
Applicant
VERSUS
Male, aged 45 years,
H. No.31- 101/A,
Sy.No.242, R.K. puram, Neredmet.village, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, R. R. Dist.
Defendants
Counsel for the parties:
For the Applicant
Sri Momin Mohammed Rafiq
For the Defendants
*&
,j .,4 o 1 ApR zr[t
Rhr'-r#
llovFilt9
(OA.No.232 of 2023)
ORDER
1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.59,67,273l_ (Rupees Fifty Nine Lakhs Sixty Seven thousand Two hundred and Seventy three only) with interest @ g.50o/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 2o/o p.a from date of application tilr the date of rearizationand in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.
2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants 1 and 2 are husband and wife who availed hosing loan of Rs.53.00 lakhs on 24.0g.2016 and executed demand promissory note, agreement of housing loan dated 26.08.2016 for Rs.53.00 lakhs. As a security towards repayment of above housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 mortgaged the property on 19.09.2016 of schedule mentioned property vide Sale deed document no.4t4O/20L6 dated 19.09.2016 in favourof Applicant bank with an intention to create security by way of equitable mortgage by depositing tiae deeds. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was the account as NpA on 25.12.20t9 and iss 6.01.2020. Inspite of ?.aalAPBWl rr- .. ! Qt*rry
(OA.No.232 of 2023)
several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.
counsel for Defendant no.1 filed vakalath but not filed written
statement.
entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as
prayed for?
(OA.No.232 of 2023)
immovable propertyas described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.
nscribed qkApril'2024)by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open
76 wr
* d1$ sd/-
(G. GOP]CHAND)
;; fi:vw PRESIDING OFFICER
'-/\ LJ
p.sar. Regtsttar
Dt!':i, ilygER.a\pnD.
Q*:,EP
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant bank is entitled to the recovery claim made in the Origination Application?
Whether the application is required to be allowed with costs?
Whether recovery certificate should be issued against the respondents?
Bank of Maharashtra Saiy4 Branch
Mrs. Anthony Hariate Margaret
Mr. Anthony Daniel
Gummadi Gopichand
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
