Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Adepu Anuradha

DRT7 Oct 2024OA/258/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Debts Recovery Tribunal application filed by Union Bank of India against borrowers Amit Adepu and Smt. Adepu Rajamani. The Bank established its claim through documentary evidence. The Tribunal directed the Defendants to pay the outstanding principal, future interest, and costs, and allowed recovery from the mortgaged and person properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay the sum of Rs. 21,71,267 with interest from 24.04.2024; Bank entitled to recover from mortgaged and person properties; Recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Smt. Adepu Anuradha — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

(OA. No.258/2024)

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶3

DATED THIS THE TTHDAY OF OCTOBER'2024

¶4

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA.No.258 of 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Union Bank of India, TNGO's colony, Waddepally, Hanamakonda, Warangal, Telangana State. Represented by its authorized officer

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS^.

¶10

SmtAdepuAnuradha, w/o Sri AdepuGopinath, aged major, occ: private employee, H. No. 16- 1 1- 19/5/2/C, ftat no.502 Vijetha park view apartments, Saleemnagar, opp lane to Telangana Grameena Bank, Amberpet, Malakpet colony, Hyderabad - 500 036.

¶11

Also at

¶12

2- lO-449, Teachers colony, Phase-II, Hanamakonda Warangal Urban - 506 001.

¶13

SmtAdepuRajamani, w/o Sri AdepuBhikshapathi, aged 58 yrs, occ: housewife, 2- t0-449, Teachers colony, Phase-II, Hanamakonda Warangal Urban - 506 001. nd a nts

¶14

(OA.No.2s8l2024)

¶15

Counsel for the parties: For the Applicant Smt. Sangeeta Jaiswal For the Defendants Exparte

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.21,71,267l_ (Rupees Twenty One

¶18

Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Two hundred and Sixty Seven only) with future interest @ 10.5% p.awith monthly rests from 24.04.2024 (inclusive of 2o/o penal interest) till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶19

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants avaired roan of Rs.35.00 rakhs on 2g.72.2020 which was collaterally secured by equitable mortgage of schedule property. The defendants executed demand promissory note, general term loan, housing loan agreement and letter of guarantee all documents dated 04.01.202t. The defendants deposited the tiUe deeds of document no.7r3/202r of Ro, warangar dated 07.01.2021. After availing the loan facili failed to comply the terms of nstrained to classify the account as NpA legal notice dated ,o.n^z\fl fit?rrfir,o

¶20

(oA. No.2s8l2024)

¶21

24.04.2024. Inspiteof several requests and demands, the

¶22

defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶23

Defendants No.1 and 2 cailed absent and set exparte on 23.0g.2024.

¶24

Sri J. Naveen, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.14.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶26

6, 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?

¶27

Defendants called 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.Al to A. 14. 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.

¶28

presei\t .. OA *il"-": ,^{as under:} .l * ----o 7 661 zrrl - ii;

¶29

B. In the result, the presei\t .. OA

¶30

(OA.No.2s8l2024)

¶31

The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2L,7L,267l_ (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Seventy One Thousand Two hundred and Sixty Seven only) with future interest @ B.5olo p.a from 24.04.2024 tnl the date of realization;

¶32

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in schedure to oA towards rearization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

t2. The Applicant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

!?:i"1"^t:-,1:r;fl1_!i"1.1.i.b"!^?Iher,^{corrected, sisned and pronounced by me in the open} court on this the Tthday of Oct,2024)

¶39

E
0nT

¶40

sd/-
(G. GOPICHAND)
PRESlDING OFFICER
poPn,
Cl,, ^RuE C.,4Afr:;1
Arsf ld&rr
1.,7-1. uviElt)l'

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Adepu Anuradha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Smt. Adepu Anuradha

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

Veladi Bhadraiah versus State Bank of India

Ms Blue Park Sea Foods Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra versus Gogineni Media Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Mr. M. Shiva Prasad

Catherine Paul Boyapalli versus Varthana Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Gopiraj Kothapeta versus Omkara Asset Recontruction Pvt. Ltd.