Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sri. Jawaharlal Gogoluthu

DRT18 Sept 2024OA/329/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application by Union Bank of India against two defendants for the recovery of dues totalling Rs. 90,31,030/- along with future interest and costs under housing, mortgage overdraft, and staff overdraft accounts, declaring the defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Permanent injunction and suit for recovery of Rs.90,31,030/- along with future interest and costs against the joint defendants.

Union Bank of India versus Sri. Jawaharlal Gogoluthu — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.329 ot 2023

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Hanumakonda branch, Warangal, Telanaqana Represented by its Br. Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri lawaharlal Gogoluthu,

¶9

s/o Ram Shankar, aged J4 yea.s, 1.^::_b?nk^{emptoyee, R/o H.ilo. r_r+,} mailaram village, palakurthymandal. Jangaon District _ 506 222. TS.

¶10

Smt Guguloth Sravanthi,

¶11

Wo Jawaharlal Gogoluthu, Rged major, occ: housewife, I{? I:}" 1^8_388, Batasamudram, l:-: :ka,sita_qa_rk,^{Ha n uma konda,} warangat 506 001. TS.

¶12

Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the parties:

¶14

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶15

Sri Momin Mohammed Rafiq Exparte

¶16

ORDER

¶17

R 1. k filed the present OA against Defendants for totll um of Rs.9O,3L,O}O/_ "", I"F$yff (Rupees Ninety Lakhs ,Thirty^One nd and Thirty onty ) I"i-.l )q.t .tr*,{ Wntq&

¶18

(OA.No.329 of 2023)

¶19

a)A sum of Rs.49,9O,LZ7/_ from defendant no.1 under housing loan account No.039530100108150 with future interest 6u 6o7o p'a with monthly rests along with penal interest of additionar 2olo p'a from date of apprication tiil the date of rearization;

¶20

b) A sum of Rs.6,73,736l- from defendant no.1 under housing roan Account No.039530100130292 with future interest @ go/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest of additional 2o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶21

c) A sum of Rs.2l,7l3g5/_ from defendant no.1 and 2 under Mortgage overdraft loan with future interest @ golo p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest of additional 2o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

d) A sum of Rs.11,95,7g2/- from defendant no.1 and 2 understaff overdraft loan with future interest @ g% p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest of addition al 2o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶23

and in default for sale of mortgaged property as clescribed in the schedule to OA.

¶24

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defen-q ::.1 availed housing loan of Rs.43.00 lakhs on 09.0 l:'ariA;Qhned composite agreement dated 13.07.2018. of housing loan, the defendant no.1 in

¶25

(oA.No.329 of 2023)

¶26

schedule to OA by depositing the original sale deed No.3g84/201g dated 22.02.201g. The defendant no.1 availed renovation loan of Rs.6,40,000/- on 04.L2.2019 and executed composite agreement. Defendant no.2 who is co_applicant along with defendant no.1 availed mortgage OD limit of Rs.20.00 lakhs on 01.06.2021 and executed demand promissory note and housing loan agreement dated 07.06.2021. Again defendants availed staff overdraft of Rs.11.00 lakhs on 08.06.2021. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 31.t0.2022 and issued demand notice dated 1g.06,2023. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA,

¶27

Defendants No.l and 2 called absent and set exparte on 26.04.2024.

¶28

Sri Ch. Rajasekhar, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself aF AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.18.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

Thel poi n is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶31

entiitled OA against the Defendants as pra)v"l^m::: -*\ 3t'^r e {p *, Er =tJ

¶32

''t' \dorssy '*"*ori'-fl^\Y

¶33

(OA.No.329 of 2023)

¶34

7' 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 rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.18. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entired to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶35

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.9O,31,O3O/_ (Rupees Ninety Lakhs Thirty One thousand and Thirty only )

¶36

a) A sum of Rs.49,90,127/_ from defendant no.1 under housing loan account No.039530100108150 with future interest @ Byo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶37

b) A sum of Rs.6,73,736/_ from defendant no.1 under housing loan Account No.039530100130292 with future interest @ Bolo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶38

c) A sum of Rs.2L,7l,3g5/_ from defendant no.1
and 2 under
Mortgage overdraft loan_vyith future interest @ B9o p.a from
date of applicatiop::
lization;
t; ,i,',{ -ffi'" .aJ)
h<br>ii.i Ii* 1s SEP Ml21|11 'r
d,$-_91
Q**s

¶39

(oA.No.329 of 2023)

¶40

d) A sum of Rs.11,95,782/- from defendant no.1 and 2 under staff overdraft loan with future interest @ Bolo p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶41

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

¶42

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person

¶43

and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶48

(Dictated to the p,A., transcribed bv her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on thrs the 18th day of Sept, 2024)

¶49

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDlNG OFFICER

¶50

,f --ffi
j losupzfitf :
kr--,#'

¶51

trwyw

Union Bank of India v. Sri. Jawaharlal Gogoluthu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sri. Jawaharlal Gogoluthu

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

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

Jambula Ravi versus State Bank of India

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mrs. Munigala Indira

T Subba Reddy versus State Bank of India