Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Maryada Vinutha Devi

DRT26 Nov 2024OA/255/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

OA filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 1.19 crore along with future interest and cost. Debents defaulted on agricultural loan secured by crops and documents. Ds remained absent. DBT allowed OA and directed joint and several liability.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents jointly and severally liable for Rs. 1.19 crore with interest; bank entitled to realize from mortgaged assets.

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Maryada Vinutha Devi — Specific Performance | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrs rHE 26rH DAy oF NovEMBER, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PREsIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.255 of 2O24

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, (E-Andhra Bank), Mahabubnagar-2 Branch, Mahabubnagar, Telangana State. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mrs. MaryadaVinutha Devi, @ Vinita Devi, W/o Maryada Prathap Reddy, female, major, #1-1, Lakshmanpur (p.N) Nadimpally, Achampet, Nagerkurnooldist - 509 375.

¶9

SmtG. Rameshwari Devi w/o Late G.V. Reddy, femate, major, villa no.61, Jayabheri

¶10

temple, besides Jayabheri park,

¶11

Narasingi, Ranga Reddy dist- 500 075.

¶12

Sri E.G. James, s/o E.G. Gershan, male, major, #4- 190,Achampet, Nagerkurnooldist - 509 337.

¶13

Mrs. KamathamMamatha, w/o K. Pradeep Kumar Reddy, female, major, #6-40, Mohammadabad village, Gandeed, Ranga Reddy dist-509

¶14

.t
nda nts

¶15

{oA.^No.256/2024)

¶16

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant

¶17

For the Defendants

¶18

Sri Srinivasa Rao Chakrala

¶19

Exparte

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,19,28,151/- (Rupees One Crore Nineteen lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Fifty One only) with future interest @ I4o/o p.a with monthly rests from 30'05.2024 till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged properties and hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶22

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendants availed for AGCSTL for a sum of Rs.39.50 lakhs for raising orchards, pomegranate, papaya and guava on 2g.02.2013 and thereby offered hypothecated plants and crops as mentioned in the schedule to oA. The defendants executed composite agreement, banks right to cancel limits, CIBIL disclosure consent, and mortgage deed. The defendants deposited the title deeds of schedule mentioned properties. After n facility, the defendants failed to comply the te applicant bank was constrained to cl nd issued demand

¶23

(oA. No.2s6l2024)

¶24

notice. Inspite of severa I requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outsta nd ing. Hence this OA.

¶25

Defendants No.1to 4 called absent and sct cxparte or 06.11.2024.

¶26

Sri Saikrushna Pradhan, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.25.

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶28

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?

¶29

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.25. 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 f uture interest and costs.

¶30

B. In the result, the present OA is allowt-. costs, as under:

¶31

(oA.No.256l2o24l

¶32

The Defendants are jointly and scvcr.rlly liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,!g,Zg,LSL/- (Rupees One crore Nineteen lakhs Twenty Eight rhousand one Hundred and Fifty one only) with future inti:rest @ 74o/o p.a from 30.05.2024 till the date of reatization;

¶33

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed aqainst the mortgaged properties and hypothecated assets as rlcscribed in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is also entitled 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

L2. The Applicant shall file a cost merno within Lwo weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

t4. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned,

¶39

(Dictated to the P.4-.-transcribed by her, corrected, srgncci and pronounccd by rnc rn the open court on

¶40

(G. GoPrcriif; PRESIDING OFFICER

¶41

Truf,:.: h, l*
/r,; oK6t,,"

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Maryada Vinutha Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Maryada Vinutha Devi

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 M/S. Karigar Home Comforts

State Bank of India versus Mr. Gumbarthi Jaya Babu

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Nelapati Hemalatha

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Ketha Purna Venkata Prasad

M/S. Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation versus M/S. Vaishnavi Sales Corporation

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. the Pegadapally Primary Agriculture Co-Operative Society Ltd.