Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Chedupally Ailaiah

DRT15 Oct 2024OA/73/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.73 of 2024, the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's claim against defendants for recovery of a housing loan, holding the bank established its case with documentary evidence as respondents were absent.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 41,97,321/- plus future interest; entitlement to proceed against mortgaged and other properties; issue of recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Chedupally Ailaiah — DRT (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER' 2c.24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.73 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Thorrur Branch, Mahabubabad district, Telangana State. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr.ChedupaltyAitaiah, S/o Eddaiah, aged about 41 years, sex: male, occ: employee, R/o H.No.15- 155/3/7, Near Rama Krishna Theatre, Thorrur _ 506 163. Mahabubabad district, Telangana.

¶9

Mrs. Chedupally Uma, W/o ChedupallyAilaiah, Aged 35 year, female, Occ: housewife, R/o H.No.15- L55/3/7 , Near Rama Krishna Theatre, Thorrur _ 506 163. Mahabubabad district, Telangana.

¶10

3 mI!i.ru!:l!?T;1ie,, m ale - , Occ: Orc' business, R/o hrrqinacc D/^ H.No,f u ^r^ r 0-Zi1 ^ ,t 6''"87qff:g a'
Thorrur - 506 163.
vanaouoabaJ, r"runsunu. *7, 1 5 0CJ"r8{0."d
counsetrortheparties: W;g|#
For the Appllcant Sri Momiri ammed Rafiq
For the Defendants
Exparte

¶11

(OA.No.73 of 2024)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.4L,g7,3Z1/- (Rupees Forty One Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Three hundred and Twenty One

¶14

only) with future interest @ g.500/o p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 2o/o p.a additional interest from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶15

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 and 2 are wife and husband availed housing loan of Rs.36,80,000/- vide letter of arrangement dated 28.11.2017. Defendant no.3 stood as guarantor to the loan availed by defendants 1 and 2. The defendants 1 and 2 created equitabre mortgage of schedule mentioned property in favour of the Appricant bank. The defendants deposited the original Sale deed bearing Doc.No.5117/2020 dated 02.06.2020. After availing the loan facility, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on L7.05.2023 and issued demand notice dated 09.10.2023 and legal

¶16

notice dated 25.0t.2024. I I requests and demands, the defendants did not cKa6e ouln ence this OA. it -{$ 15\ffMl

¶17

(OA.No.73 of 2024)

¶18

Defendants No.1 to 3 cailed absent and set exparte on Lg.04.2024.

¶19

Sri Dharawath Kishore, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A. 1to A.11.

¶20

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶21

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶22

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶23

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 relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A. 11. 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 craim 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 joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sutotal susu 21l- (Rupees Forty One(Rupees Forty OneForty OneOne

¶25

Applicant Bank a total sutotal susu 21l- (Rupees Forty One(Rupees Forty OneForty OneOne Lakhs Ninety Seven red and Twenty One 15ofinru : !, ^!! / .$-zi'

¶26

(oA.No.73 of 2024)

¶27

only) with future interest @ 8.50o/o p.a from date of application till the date of realization;

¶28

The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the mortgaged property as described in schedule to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶29

The Applicant Bank is arso entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

L4, Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 15th day of Oct,2024)

¶34

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDlNG OFFICER

150mml

L'W^rRuF c9ry

o#ilw';onenn'

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Chedupally Ailaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Chedupally Ailaiah

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

Central Bank of India versus M/S. Cold Care Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Smt. Donthi Narmada

Sri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal versus Icici Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus Mr, Kalva Annapurna

Ms Masani Reddy Poultry Farms versus Canara Bank

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Krishna Madhura Cotton Traders