Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Mohd Abdul Razzak Quadri

DRT22 Mar 2024OA/257/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT-I Hyderabad allowed Union Bank of India's original application for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 23,71,904/ along with future interest and costs from two defaulting employees, proceeding ex parte due to their absence.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of joint and several liability to pay Rs. 23,71,904/ with future interest; authority to proceed against mortgaged property and personal assets; issuance of recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Mohd Abdul Razzak… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 22NDDAY OF MARCH'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA.No.257 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, D.No.21-1-978 to 982, PB No.616, Rikabganj, High Court, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 002. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. Mohd Abdul Razzakeuadri, s/o Mohd Abdul Khader, aged major, male, occ: employee, R/o H. No. 1 7- 8-533/ L44/ r/ A, Bagh e- Jahan AraChawniNadAli Baig, Yakutpura, Charminar, Hyderabad, Telangana- SO0 023.

¶9

Mr. MohdTaufeeqeuadri, S/o Mohd Abdut Khader, aged major, male, occ: employee, R/o H. No. 1 7- 8-533 / t44/ t/ B, Bagh e- Jahan AraChawniNadAli Baig, Yakutpura, Charminar, Hyderabad, Telangana- 500 023.

¶10

Defendants

¶11

-?}r)
//t ^ #
Counsel for the pa
PrP &
For the Applicant Pavan Kumar
.L; 2??iiflili{
For the Defendan
fi
'.*'" "
Ka+#

¶12

(oA.No.257 of 2023)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.23,71,904/- (Rupees Twenty Three lakhs Seventy One thousand Nine hundred and four only) with future interest @ 10.45olo p.a with monthly rests from date of the application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendants availed a sum of Rs.20.00 lakhs under union Home Scheme with a floating rate of interest @ 8.45olo p.a and agreed to pay overdue interest @ 2olo p.a in 347 EMIs.The defendants executed letter of continuity, letter of undertaking and demand promissory note on 15.05.2017. The loan was secured with collateral security as mentioned in the schedule property and the defendants deposited the Regd Sale deed Doc.No.896/2015 dated 27.02.20L5 and Regd Ratification deed No.5407/2016 dated 12.09,2016. The memorandum of deposit of title deeds was also executed by defendants and registered vide document no.2699/2017 dated 16.05.20t7. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of the applicant bank was constrained to classi issued demand notice ;;ffi"''ni i z ? ttAP' ?il?{ : \8. -^i, w

¶16

(OA.No.2s7 of 2023)

¶17

dated 01.06.2023. Inspiteof several reguests and demands, the

¶18

defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 29.tL.2023.

¶20

Sri Parisha Rakesh, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are

¶21

marked as Ex.A.1to A.11.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶24

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶25

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 relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.11. 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 Applicant Bank is entiiled ver the claim made in the OA with

¶26

future interest and "-&'%

¶27

B. In the result, .3 6nfil& a?0i$reo 1 costs, as u nder:

¶28

fut,.t

¶29

(OA.No.257 of 2023)

¶30

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.23,71,9O4/- (Rupees Twenty Three lakhs Seventy One thousand Nine hundred and four only) with future interest @ 10.45olo p.a from date of the application till the date of rea lization ;

¶31

The Applicant bank is entiiled to proceed against the mortgaged immovable property as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

the Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(qi bed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open eor at March'2024) ,{-' ..,' '/ iF sdlrr."r copy r-J:,r",r%':iii:l LV. K.Y"*JV_-,#:iifEffin\

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Mohd Abdul Razzak Quadri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Mohd Abdul Razzak Quadri

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Ganapathi Building Constructions

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Laxmi Prasanna Trading

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Bhaskara Enterprises

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S. Kunda Transformers Private Limited

Smt Meera Thakur versus Central Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus v. S. Constructions and Developers