Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Munigala Indira

DRT19 Sept 2024OA/285/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

OA filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of loan dues against private borrowers. Tribunal observed document Swa.1 as @J.1, cross-referenced from document Swa.1 as @J.1, held. OA allowed. Order granting certificate to recover Rs.25,45,318/- less realized sum of Rs.21,88,000/-.

What did the court decide?

OA allowed with costs; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.25,45,318/- less realized Rs.21,88,000/- with interest.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mrs. Munigala Indira — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶3

OA.No.285 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Bank of Maharashtra, SAM branch, Bank street, Koti, Hyderabad, T.S. Represented by its authorized sig n ato ry

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mrs. Munigala Indira, w/o Munigala Vinod Kumar, female, occ: business, H.No. 12-1-330/1, kummarvadi, Asif nagar, Hyderabad - 500 028.

¶9

Mr. Munigala Vinod Kumar, s/o M. SreeRamulu, 1.ale,^{aged 46 years, occ:business,} R/o- H. No. 12- t-330 / l, Kummarwadi, Asif Nagar, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶10

Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the parties:
For the Applicant Sri Momin Mohammed Rafiq
For the Defenda *t
Exparte
19SEP
C-L,'
1. The Appti
nt OA against Defendants for
recovery of a 25A5,3L8/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Lakhs Forty Five thousand Three hundred and Eighteen only)

¶12

(oA.28s/20231

¶13

with interest @ 8.75o/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 2% p.a from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶14

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants No.1 and 2 availed housing loan of Rs.22.OO lakhs on 14.L2.2078 and executed demand promissory note, agreement of housing loan dated 29.L2.2OLB. Defendant no.1 mortgaged the schedule property more fully described in the schedule to OA and deposited the tifle deed no.203 4r/20t8 dated 31.12.2018. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued legal notice dated 16.09.2023. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶15

Defendants No.1 and 2 called absent and set exparte on 29.04.2024.

¶16

Sri Praveen Kumar Mahto, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A. 1 to A.10. realized a sum of Rs.21,88,oo o / - bysare or,.ffS,;.&.,;N^*reesr nct.

¶17

Heard the Ld. counset ror tne;ifppriJafl,Sfr,pZl : ','r''li "r ^j of; \r*

¶18

(oA.28sl2023)

¶19

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?

¶20

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,A1 to A.10. 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶21

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointry and severaily riabre to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2S,45,31g/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Forty Five thousand Three hundred and Eighteen only) with interest @ 8.75olo p.a from date of application till the date of realizationLESS a sum of Rs.21,gg,ooo/- realized through sale of schedule property ;

¶22

The Applicant Bank is against the person

¶23

,,,!:t

¶24

and properties of defendahts of the debt due.

¶25

)M4^*'

¶26

(oA.28sl2023)

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

L2. Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶30

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶31

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 19th day of Sept, 2024)

¶32

sdt_ (G. GOPICHAND)

¶33

PRES!DING OFFICER

¶34

f -.B
i.'.t
RUEGOtrV.o!ffi"
; lesEPrm ;
Asst Rearrsl/ar
DRT.I, HYDF.RttAAD
.,6ry'

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Munigala Indira

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Munigala Indira

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 Sri. Jawaharlal Gogoluthu

M S Zain Minerals Rep by Its Managing Partner Azghar Ahmed versus Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation

State Bank of India versus Sri. Gunter Naresh

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Zenith Import and Export

T Subba Reddy versus State Bank of India

Sri Dyavanapally Srinivas versus Union Bank of India