Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Vema Subha Rani

DRT13 Nov 2024OA/63/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.63 of 2024, Debts Recovery Tribunal-I at Hyderabad adjudged on an ex-parte application. The court upheld the bank's claim for recovery of agricultural and term loans totaling Rs.37,00,651 along with future interest and costs, and granted the bank authority to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.37,00,651 with future interest at 12% p.a.; bank allowed to realize debt against mortgaged and personal properties; decree for costs.

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Vema Subha Rani — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER'2024

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.63 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Yerrupalem branch, Yerrupalem village, Khammam district - 507 2Ot. Telangana State Rep by its Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mrs. Vemasubha Rani, w/o VemaRambabu, aged 40 years, occ: housewife, R/o Near Pragna vidyanekethan, Yerrupalem village - 507 20L. Khammam district, Telangana State.

¶9

Mr. VemaRambabu,

¶10

s/o Venkateswara Rao, aged 45 yrs, occ: business, R/o Near Pragna vidyanekethan, Yerrupalem village - 507 2Ol. Khammam district, Telangana State.

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

: Sri MVS Prasad For the Applicant For the Defendants : Expa rte

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.37,OO,65Ol- (Rupees Thirty Seven

¶15

(OA.No.63 of 2024)

¶16

Lakhs Six Hundred and Sixty only) with future interest @ l2o/o p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realizatlon and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶17

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 and 2 are wife and husband availed Agri card facility of Rs.1.00 lakh on 30.08.2012. The defendants executed composite agreement, demand promissory note dated 30.08.2012. Again defendants availed Rs.1,99,000/- on 13.04.2016 and executed necessary documents. Subsequently the defendants availed term loan of Rs.32.00 lakhs on 07.07.20t7 and executed 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 01.04.2021 and issued demand notice dated t6.O4.2027. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶18

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 10.06.2024.

¶19

Sri Y. SurendraNatha Reddy, Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶20

which 5. Heard the Ld. counset for the Appticant ,. ;Llkr!0u^7lt7t .-J; ' . 2 -o.Qs-0s tto4S";; "':1,,--:'@

¶21

(OA.No.63 of 2024)

¶22

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?

¶23

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. 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.

¶24

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.37,OO,66Ol- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Six Hundred and Sixty only) with future interest @ L2o/o^p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶25

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due,

¶26

The Applicant Bank The Applicant Bank is

¶27

The Applicant Bank The Applicant Bank is ed to against the person a nd prope rties of d efend a nts,toryqf gftT4ea t izBti of the debt due.

¶28

r
-c-I:'
,'roqf$7
-=goollYD

¶29

(OA.No.63 of 2024)

¶30

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

¶31

t2. The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶32

of receipt of order.

¶33

J-J. Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

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

¶36

sd/_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶37

*
l3r0lm a
r,
-oq'{;

¶38

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Vema Subha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Vema Subha Rani

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 M/S. Sri Vasthav Vermi Products

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Srinivasa Traders

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Roja Pvc Implements

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Agritech

Kosetty Krishna versus Bank of Baroda

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Warehousing and Logistics