Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Zahada Mohammed (Died)

DRT13 Dec 2024OA/328/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India against several defendants for recovery of a housing loan defaulting amount of approximately Rs. 63.65 lakhs along with interest and costs, after hearing evidence from the bank manager.

What did the court decide?

Directed Defendants No. 2 to 7 to jointly and severally pay Rs. 63,65,597.93 with interest at 8.80% p.a. and allowed the bank to refer to mortgaged and personal properties.

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Zahada Mohammed (Died) — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER' 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.328 ot 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, Hanumakonda branch, Telangana state,

¶7

Represented by its authorized Signatory

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Mrs.ZahadaMohammed,(died) w/o Mohammed Ismail

¶11

Mr. Mohammed Ismail, s/o MdZaffar, male, aged about 69 years, occ: business, R/o H.No.11-23-1253, LB nagar,

¶12

Warangal - 506 002.

¶13

Mr. Mohammed llyas, s/o Mohammed Ismail, male, aged about 36 yrs,

¶14

occ: business,

¶15

R/o H.no.11-23-t253, LB nagar, Warangal -506 002.

¶16

Mr. Mohammed Imtiyaz, s/o Mohammed Ismail, male, aged about 45 yrs, occ: business, R/o H.no.11-23-L253, LB nagar, Warangal -506 002.

¶17

Mr. Mohammed lrshad, s/o Mohammed Ismail, male, aged about 43 yrs,

¶18

occ: business,

¶19

(OA. No.293/2024)

¶20

R/o H.no.11-23-1253, LB nagar, Warangal -506 002.

¶21

Mr. Mohammed Imran, s/o Mohammed Ismail, male, aged about 36 yrs, occ: business, R/o H.no.11-23-L253, LB nagar, Warangal -506 002.

¶22

Mr. Mohammed Ismat, D/o Mohammed Ismail, male, aged major occ: business, R/o H.no.11-23-1253, LB nagar, Warangal -506 002.

¶23

Defendants

¶24

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant

¶25

For the Defendants

¶26

Mr. Momin Mohammed Rafiq Expa rte

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.63,65,597.93ps (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Seven and paise Ninety three only) with interest @ B.B0o/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 2o/o p.a from date_of filing of OA till the date of realization and rgrd@{qsale of mortgaged property as described ,n,n" r.nrdffi3QD,F"

¶29

;; 2. As per the averments in the uooi,.u,,tnl $.,E"C flfif,,..*ilanr states r.. j i that defendant No.1 is the ci behind her

¶30

(oA. No.2e3l2024)

¶31

legal heirs/ defendants no.2 to 7. Defendant no.1, defendant no.2 as co-applicant and defendant no.3 as co-obligant availed housing loan of Rs.32.00 lakhs on 07.03.2018. To secure due repayment of loan, the defendants executed sanction letter, composite agreement, deed of guarantee, letter of undertaking, consent letters dated 07.03.2018. As a security towards repayment of housing loan, the defendant no.1 mortgaged the schedule mentioned property to the Applicant bank and deposited the original sale deed No.5274/2008 dated 30.10.2008. On 04.10.2018, defendants 1 to 3 again availed a housing loan of Rs.21.00 lakhs and executed various necessary documents. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NPA on 29.01.2022 and issued demand notice dated 20.12.2022.Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶32

Defendants No.2 to 7 called absent and set exparte on 27.02.2024.

¶33

Sri Ch. Rajasekhar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relev ich are marked as

¶34

¶35

(OA.No.293/2024)

¶36

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?

¶37

Defendants No.2 to 7 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.Al to A.16. 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.

¶38

B. In the result, the^present OA^is allowed^{with costs,as under:} The Defendants No.2 to 7 are^jointly and severally^{liable to pay to} the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.63,65,597.93ps^(Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand^{Five Hundred Ninety} Seven and paise Ninety three only) with^interest @^{8.80% p.a} from date of filing of OA till the date of^realization.

¶39

The Applicant bank is entitled to^{proceed against the mortgaged} property as described in ards realization of the t to proceed only to debt due.How evet thel{rti}.iffi.t i; ,j:i" !, the extent of estate from the deceased :''"tTttthF"'I defendant no.1. Q**+W

¶40

(oA.N0.293/2024)

¶41

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No. 2 to 7 towards realization of the debt due.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

(Dictated to the P,A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of Dec,2024)

¶47

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

B
{',f t
* 1300EI
i..-1.. 11.'
". r-r ,.. '' i./
Xccv

¶49

J"Hlw*
*1fi;$i?ii'f;'^'

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Zahada Mohammed (Died)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Zahada Mohammed (Died)

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

State Bank of India versus M/S. Om Sree Venkatanameswara Prelam Private Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Mantena Laboratories Ltd.

Mr Arepula Yadagiri versus Bank of Baroda

Bank of India versus Dindigala Purushotham

Canara Bank versus M/S. Maha Ganapathi Trading

State Bank of India versus M/s. Paramount Solutions