Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Garlapati Subramanyam Swamy

DRT7 May 2024OA/326/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal order, the bank filed an OA for recovery of a total sum of approximately 34.69 lakhs along with interest against three defendants. The tribunal, hearing the applicant ex-parte, observed that the bank established its claim via witness examination and documents. The OA was allowed, making defendants jointly and severally liable for the principal, future interest, and g

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to jointly and severally pay Rs. 34,69,659 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged and other properties; issue recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Garlapati Subramanyam Swamy — DRT (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MAY' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.326 of 2OZ2

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, 7 Tombs Road branch, (now merged into Tolichowki Branch) Tolichowki, Hyderabad, TS - 500 008. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applica nt

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mr. GarlapatiSubramanyamSwamy S/o Sri G. Basava Rao, male, Occ: business, aged about 50 years, H. No.8-3-677 I 59/2, Sai Krishna Navodaya colony, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500 032. TS.

¶10

Mr. K. Venkata Krishna Rao, (co-obligant) S/o KokaKoteswar Rao, occ: business, aged about 51 years, H.No.9-5-11A, P.B. Colony, Hyderabad - 500 032. TS.

¶11

Mrs. G. DurgaSubrahmanyam, .r::al.ll" ----'l\ (Co-obl i ga nt) W/o G. SuOra n m#ya'fi(l." ..'i^r.v4;-':1. ',''l:,

¶12

Swamy, occ: housewire, ageo abi;tt iii 41 years, H.No, .B.8 -3-67 7 )tiiiz, / 59 12,^{---' irt} '':. "i Srinagar colony, Hyderabad 32. , iill t Tpl: nnr na Qtrla :i-:ll

¶13

Counsel for the Pa rties:

¶14

For the Applicant

¶15

For the Defendants Expa rte

¶16

(oA.No.326 of 2022)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.34,69,659l- (Rupees Thirty four Lakhs Sixty Nine thousand Six hundred and Fifty Nine only) i.e.,

¶19

a) Defendants No.1 & 2 to pay a sum of Rs.!7,24,072l_in respect of account No.295430100000140 with current and future interest @r2'750/o p'awith monthry rests from date of oA ti, the date of realization;

¶20

b) Defendants No.1 & 3 to pay a sum of Rs.17,45,587/_ in respect of Account no.295430100000566 with current and future interest @ 77.75o/o p.awith monthry rests from date of oA tiil the date oF realization;

¶21

and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as described in the schedules,'A to C,, to OA.

¶22

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 along with defendant no.2 availed mortgage loan of Rs.25.00 lakhs by mentioned A

¶23

Property. Thedefendant agreement dated

¶24

(oA.No.326 of 2022)

¶25

No.5320/2015 with an intention to create equitable^mortgagein favour of Applicant Bank. The defendant^no.1 along^{with defendant} no.3 who is co-obligant availed mortgage loan of^{Rs.25.00 lakhs vide} account no.295430100000566 on mortgaging^{schedulementioned} property "8" to OA. The defendants 1 & 3 deposited the title deeds of Regd. Sale deed dated 18.01.2016 vide^{Regd Sale deed} documents No.27712016 & 278/20L6^{with an intentionto create} equitable mortgage and executed mortgage^deed on^19.03.2016. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants^{failed to complythe} terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank^{was constrained to} classlfy the account as NPA on 31.03.2022 and issued notices.Inspite of several requests and demands, the^{defendantsdid} not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶26

Defendants No.1 and 3 called absent and^{set exparte on 2L.09.2023} and defendant no.2 called absent and^set exparteon^29.2.2024.

¶27

Shri Md. Abdul Aziz, Branch Manager of the^{ApplicantBank} examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited^{relevantdocuments,which} are marked as Ex.A.l to A.17.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^Bank.

¶29

¶30

(OA.No.326 of 2022)

¶31

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?

¶32

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.17. 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 entitled to recover the claim made In the oA with future interest and costs.

¶33

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶34

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.34,69,659/_ (Rupees Thirty four Lakhs Sixty Nine thousand Six hundred and Fifty Nine only) i,e.,

¶35

a) Defendants No.1 & 2 to pay a sum of Rs.t7,24,072l_ in respect of account No.295430100000140 with current and future interest @12.75o/o p.a from date of OA till the date of realization;

¶36

b) is,rz,+s,se7l- in respect of with current and future interest @

¶37

1.1..75o/o p.a from date of OA till the date oF realization;

¶38

¶39

(OA.No.326 of 2022 )

¶40

c) The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties as described in schedules "A to C" to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

S)^{Issue Recovery certificateaccordingly.}

¶45

h) Communicate a copy of the order to the pafties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 7th day of May'2024)

¶47

sdl-
(G. GOPTCHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Garlapati Subramanyam Swamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Garlapati Subramanyam Swamy

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sri. Gudala Girish

Sri Haridas Ramesh and Others versus State Bank of India

Sri Mohmmed Hamed Ali versus State Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Ayyappa Pharma and Surgicals

Union Bank of India, (E- Andhra Bank) versus Mr. Palnati Phani Kumar

State Bank of India versus Ayanar Polymers