Allowed

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Mr.Bethi Somi Reddy

DRT30 Aug 2024OA/521/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Union Bank's OA for recovery of housing loan dues from three defendants. With no written statement, evidence, or arguments filed by respondents, the bank's un-challenged documents clinched the claim, leading to joint and several liability.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 30,38,045.07 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties for realization of dues.

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) versus Mr.Bethi Somi Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 3OTH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIG]NAL APPLICATION NO. 521 OF 2022

¶4

Union Bank of India (e And hra Bank) S R Nagar Branch S R Nagar, Hyderabad-38.

¶5

....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.4r. Bethi Somi Reddy. S/o Laxma Reddy Aged: 61 years #4-3, Plot Nos. 119 & 117 Peerzad iguda Village Uppal l4andal, Medcha l- Malkajgiri Dist. 500 039

¶8

Mrs. Bethi Sobha Rani W/o Somi Reddy Aged:48 yea$, #4-3, Plot Nos. 119 & 117 Peerzadiguda Village Uppal Mandal, MedchalMalkajgiri Dist. 500 039

¶9

Mr. Silveru Srisailam S/o Polaiah, Major # 11-11-409 Sowbhagya^puram Colony Saroornagar, L. B. Nagar Hydera bad-500035.

¶10

... Defendants.

¶11

: Mr. Srinivasa Rao Chakrala. Counsel for Applicant Counsel for Defendants 1&2 : No reDresentation. Defendant No.3 : Exparte. /W*r-

oa.52712022

:: ORDER^::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoveryof a} sum of Rs.30,38,045.07ps^{from the defendantsjointly and} severally with^{[email protected] p a till the date of realisation} alonq with^{costs and saleof OA scheduleproperty'}

¶16

The averments of^{applicant bank as per the OA, briefly, are that} the defendants^{availeda housing loan of Rs'30,00,000/-under} sanction^{letterdated 28.01.2011. The loan is to be repayablein} 240 EMIS with 10.75%^{interest p.a. Defendantsexecuted all} necessary loan^{document includingMODT.However, due t0} default in^{payment of EMIS, applicant issued demandnotice} under the^{provisionsof SARFAESI Act dated 27} '06'2016'^rhe defendants failed to^{clear the dues despite regularfollowup'} Hence this OA.

¶17

Defendants l and 2 entered^{appearancethroughMukesh} Sharma, Advocate, but did^{not choose to file written statement.} Accordingly, their right to file written^{statement has been} forfeited on 01.09.2023.

¶18

Summons served on 3'd defendant. He was called absent and no representation. Hence he was set exparte.

¶19

Applicant Bank examined Anand Kumar Biradar, Manager, as AW-1 and marked 16 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.16. fu*'

¶20

oa.52t/2022

¶21

Right of defendants 1 and 2 to adduce evidence has been forfeited on 24.04.2024 as there was no representation on their be ha lf.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant reported no oral arguments. Right of defendants 1 and 2 to advance arguments forfeited for n on^- rep resentation. Perused the written arguments filed by the learned counsel for the applicant and the material placed on record.

¶23

B. The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants and sale of OA schedule property as prayed for?

¶25

As stated supra, of the three defendants, two of them have not filed written statement, adduced evidence, advanced oral arguments or cross examlned the Applicant's Witness. Whereas 3'd defendant remained exparte. Under such circumstances, the Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in Exs.A.1 to A.16 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank remains un-rebutted and unchallenged clinching the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence the Defendants 1 to 3 are^jointly and severally liable to pay the claim made by the Applicant Bank in the O.A. with future interest and costs

¶26

In the result, the present Origlnal Application No.52l/2O22 is allowed as under: -

lfu:1xtu

oA.52Ll2022

i) Defendants 1 to 3 are^jointly and severally liable to pav a sum of Rs.30,38,045.07^ps to the applicant bank with interest @10.75olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶31

ii) the OA claim is secured by way mortgage of OA schedule^property and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for realisation clf its dues;

¶32

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the: person and properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶35

t2. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned and upload on Web Portal.

¶37

(Dictated to the sleno, signed and pronounced by ne in the open courl on this the 3dh day of August, 2021).

¶38

$tut"

¶39

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Mr.Bethi Somi Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (e-Andhra Bank) v. Mr.Bethi Somi Reddy

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

Ms De Fab versus Uco Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Atul Shekhar

Hdfc Bank versus Rajender Prasad Gupta

Icici Bank Limited versus Subrat Enterprises

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Bindal Product Masala Udyog

Canara Bank versus Bhuneshwar Bharti (Deceased)