Allowed

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

DRT17 Dec 2024OA/286/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by UCO Bank for recovery of Rs. 59,86,550.93 with interest from Defendants, including a trading firm and individual guarantors, and proceeded against hypothecated movables and properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 59,86,550.93 with interest from 01.05.2024; entitlement to proceed against hypothecated movables and properties of Defendants.

M/S . Uco Bank versus M/S. Vanitha Jyothi Mahila… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE DAY OF DECEMBER' 2024

¶3

'.TTH

¶4

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA.No.286 of 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

M/s. UCO Bank, Wanaparthy branch, Ma haboobnaga r d istrict Telangana - 500 003. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/sVanithalyothiMahilaSangam, Rep. by its Chief A.K.Khammar Rahman,

¶11

H. No, 24-9, Gandhi Chowk,

¶12

Wanaparthy, Mahbubnagar - 509103.

¶13

Mrs.A.K.Khammar Rahman w/o MARaheem, Occ: Business, aged about55years, Female, H.No.B-44/2, Sri SaiNagar Colony, Balapur, RR Dist.,-500005.

¶14

Mrs.Khaisar Khan w/o Afsar Khan, Aged about 33years, Female, Occ: Business, H.No.24-3/A, Gandhi Chowk, Savaigudem, Wanaparthy, Mahbubnagar - 509103.

¶15

Mrs.Naziya Begum d/o Mohammed Ahmed, Aged about 30years, Female,Occ: Business, H.No. L-57 /1, Balanagar, Wanaparthy, Mahbubnagar - 509103.

¶16

fi,tu h\r
fr*
; 17 0ECzrPt
W*w

¶17

(oA.286 of 2024)

¶18

Mrs.Khalida Begum, w/o MohammedNaseeruddin, Aged about 38years, Female, Occ: Business, H.No.24-3l1, GandhiChowk, Savaigudem, Wanaparthy,Mahbubnagar - 509103.

¶19

Mrs.Naseem Begum w/o Chand pasha, Occ: Business Aged about 35years,Female, H. No.B-37, Madeenanagar colony, Kothakota, Mahbubnagar-509381.

¶20

Mrs. Kanis Begum w/o Kahja pasha, Aged about 25years, Female, Occ: Business, H.No. 12-31, BC Hostel Road,Kothakota, Mahbubnagar - 509381.

¶21

B. Mrs. Wahada Begum, w/o Mohammed Mahmud, Aged about 57years, Female, Occ: Business, H.No.24-711, Gandhi Nagar, Wanaparthy, Mahbubnagar-509103.

¶22

Mrs.Noorjahan Begum, w/o Anwar Khan, Aged about 55 years, Female, Occ: Business,H.No.24-911, Gandhi Chowk, Savaigudem, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar - 509103.

¶23

Mrs. Julekha Begum Aged about 50 years, Female,

¶24

Occ: Business H.No.8-44/ 2, Ba la pu r,Sa roornaga r, Hydera bad- 50003 5

¶25

Defendants

¶26

Counsel for the Parties:

¶27

For the Applicant For the Defendants

Sri N.V. Subba Raju

1 7 fiEt,7.Wl

(OA.286 of 2024)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the^{present OA against Defendants for} recovery of a total sum of Rs.59,85,55o.93ps^(RupeesFifty Nine Lakhs Eighty Six Thousand^{Five Hundred Fifty and paise} Ninety Three only) with^{further interest@ 13'50% p'awith} monthly rests from 0t.05.2024^{till the date of realizationand in} default for sale of^{hypothecatedmovables as describedin the} schedule to OA.

¶33

As per the averments^{in the application, the ApplicantBankstates} thatdefendantsavailedcreditfacilities/termloanofRs.25.00lakhs on hypothecation^{of goods and machinery. Defendants No'2,3,6 and} Tbeingguarantorsexecutedagreementofguaranteeinfavourof the Applicant bank.^{Subsequentlythe defendant no'1 availed} additional credit limits^{of Rs.12,50,000/-and executed documents.} Defendants2,3,Sandgstoodasguarantorsandexecutedguarantee agreement.Thedefendantno.lagainavailedRs.6'00lakhsas additional working^{capitaltermloan of Rs'6'00 lakhs and Rs'3'00} lakhs and executed^{demand promissorynote, letter of waiver,letter} from borrower and undertaking^{etc.After availingthe loan facility,} '::_,._ _ to comply the terms^{of sanction,hence the} strained to classify^{the accountas NPA and} 1 7^0EC zut

¶34

(oA.286 of 2024)

¶35

issued notices. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶36

Defendants No.1 to 10 called absent and set exparte on 21.11.2024.

¶37

Sri T. Narendra, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.39.

¶38

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶39

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?

¶40

Counsel for 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.39. 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.

¶41

B.''' toA is allowed with costs, as under: .,ri The Ficfendants jointly and severally liable to pay to the sum

¶42

. +il,.S{4lo " of Rs.59,86,550.93ps (Rupees Fifty 4

¶43

¶44

(OA.286 of 2024)

¶45

Nine Lakhs Eighty Six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty and paise Ninety Three only) with further interest @ 13.50olo p.a from 01.05.2024 till the date of realization,

¶46

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶47

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 10 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶51

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶52

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of Dec, 2024)

¶53

,s
?-eQffi
&h %'<br>,f

¶54

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶55

F,RtrE* "'- =-"-ts7-( Assr. RCgrstrar rlr,1;i'i.iu4---.1r^

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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 Mr. Burra Uday Bhaskar

Union Bank of India versus ramakoteswara rao

Indian Overseas Bank versus Kashyap

State Bank of India versus Sri Muggu Kumar

Indusind Bank Limited versus Radhika

Indian Bank versus M/S. Mamatha Enterprises