Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. Sri Sugyam Vittal

DRT18 Dec 2024OA/242/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, at Hyderabad, adjudicated an Original Application filed by City Union Bank Ltd for recovery of dues from multiple individual and corporate respondents. The Tribunal allowed the application, subject to a deduction, and directed payment with interest and costs, affirming the bank's recovery rights over mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to jointly and severally pay Rs. 1,42,37,529/- less Rs. 60 lakhs, with interest as flagged, plus future interest, costs, and execution against mortgaged properties.

City Union Bank Limited versus Sri Sugyam Vittal — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER' 2c,24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.242 ot 2OZ4

¶4

Between:

¶5

City Union Bank Ltd, 4-3-75/2, Hameedpura, Near Nethaji chowk, Opp to Big Bazaar, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶6

Represented by its Branch Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri Sugyam Vittal, s/o Sugyam Hanmanna, aged 61 years, male, R/o 1 -7-956/t, Ravindra

¶10

Nagar, Near Govt Degree college, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶11

Smt Sugyam Vimala, w/o Sugyam Vittal, aged 52 years, female, R/o 1 -L-956/ t, Ravindra

¶12

Nagar, Near Govt Degree college,

¶13

Adilabad - 504 001.

¶14

M/s. Sri Sai Bharathi Traders CA, Represented by its^proprietor, Sri Sugyam Vittal, 3-1-277 /2/D, Gunj road,

¶15

Adilabad - 504 001.

¶16

M/s. Sugyam Vittat (HUF), Rep by its Karta, Sri Sugyam Vittal, R/o t-t-956/t, Ravindra nagar, Near govt Degree college, Adilabad - 504 001.

¶17

1 I EIC 202{

¶18

M/s. Annadatha Seeds &

¶19

loA.No.242l2O24l

¶20

Pesticides, Rep by its proprietor, No.3/t/277/8, NH No.7, Panjabi chowk, Adilabad - 504 001...... Defendants

¶21

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Sri C. Prabhakar

Expa rte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.L,42t37,529l- (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Thirty Seven thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Nine only) i.e.,

¶28

a)A sum of Rs.57,94,060/- from defendants 1 to 4 with further interest @ 72.75o/o p.a with monthry rests from date of apprication till the date of realization;

¶29

b)A sum of Rs.6,81,639/- from defendants t,2, & 5 with further interest @ 9.25o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

c) A sum of Rs.42,709/- from defendants 1 & 2 with further interest @ 10.50o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date oF rea lization ;

¶31

d) A sum of Rs. ,tzL/from defendants 1 to 4 with further interest @ 12.75 plfi with monthly rests from date of application f

¶32

..titt \ng {fl&Sfeari

¶33

(OA.No.2a2/2O2a)

¶34

and in default for sale of mortgaged and hypothecated properties as described in the schedule "I to VI" to OA.

¶35

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants No.1 & 2 availed generar loan of Rs.10.00 lakhs for purchase of motor car vide sanction letter dated 06.07.2018. Defendants 1to 4 avaired oD rimit of Rs.50.00 rakhs on 31.01.2018 for running the business of defendant no.3. Defendants 1,3 & 4 executed DP note dated 31.01.2018. Defendant no.2 executed guarantee agreement dated 31.01.2019. Defendant no.2 created equitable mortgage of schedule property I and deposited the sale deed no.61/2018 dated 03.01.2018. Defendant no.1 created equitable mortgage on 20.05.2017 in respect of Schedule property_ II. Defendants 1,2 and 5 availed OLCC loan of Rs.70.00 lakhs on 2t.09.2019. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued demand notice dated 06.11.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶36

,r,..I;.^
3. Defendants calletsl nt and set exparte on 06.09.2024.
;r '<br>1$t$tcmr 3]i
.il.
,..):,.1*.PVEY,#_dr'
$i,n

¶37

(OA.No.2a2l2024)

¶38

Sri P. Sai Kumar, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.37. The Applicant bank filed part satisfaction memo stating that a sum of Rs.6o.Oolakhs was received in the group OD account.

¶39

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶40

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶41

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.37. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶42

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.L,42,37,529/(Rupees One Crore Lakhs Thirty Seven thousand Five Hundred

¶43

rB'o\

,^{18 oE0mt} 3l

W*,*&

(oA.No.24212024)

and Twenty Nine only) LESS A SUM OF RS.6O.OO LAKHS

¶49

RECEIVED.

¶50

a) A sum of Rs.57,94,060/- from defendants 1 to 4 with fu rther interest @ 72.75o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶51

b) A sum of Rs.6,81,639/- from defendants 1,2, & 5 with further interest @ 9.25olo p.a from date of application till the date of rea lization ;

¶52

c) A sum of Rs.42,709/- from defendants 1 & 2 with fu rther interest @ 10.50o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶53

d) A sum of Rs.77,Lg,l2L/- frcm defendants 1 to 4 with further interest @ 12.75o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶54

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged and

¶55

hypothecated properties as described in schedule "I to VI" to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶56

The Applicant Bank is arso entifled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.1 & 2 and properties of defendants realization of the debt due.

¶57

titled to the costs of the OA.

¶58

(oA.No.242 12024)

¶59

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

¶60

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶61

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶62

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 18th day of Dec, 2024)

¶63

sd/ - (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶64

; lofficzmi

¶65

¶66

DRT-I,ldYffEF:l.8'll0

City Union Bank Limited v. Sri Sugyam Vittal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. Sri Sugyam Vittal

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

State Bank of India versus Sri Muggu Kumar

Indusind Bank Limited versus Radhika

M/S . Uco Bank versus M/S. Vanitha Jyothi Mahila Sangam

Indian Bank versus M/S. Mamatha Enterprises

Mrs D Umadevi versus Aptus Value Housing Finance India Ltd.

City Union Bank Limited versus Avanthi Agro Agencies