Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Kumbham Nagesh

DRT27 Feb 2025OA/278/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for recovery of Rs. 20.22 lakhs along with future interest and costs against the defendant. The court held that the bank established its claim upon documentary evidence presented by its witness, while the defendant remained absent.

What did the court decide?

Respondent liable to pay Applicant Bank Rs. 20,22,242 with future interest @ 11.95% p.a. from 25.05.2024; recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Kumbham Nagesh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27IH DAY OF FEBRUARY'2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.278 ol 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, Devarakonda branch, Vishnu complex, Main road, Nalgonda - 508 248, TS. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mr. Kumbham Nagesh, Prop: New South land footwear, S/o Kumbham Sathaiah, Aged 32 years, male, # 19-797/44, Vishnu complex, Main road, Devarakonda, Nalgonda - 508 248. TS.

¶10

And also at:

¶11

Mr. Kumbham Nagesh, Prop: M/s. New South Land Footwear, aged 32 years, male, #4-I28, Kandukur, Gundlapally mandal, Nalgonda - 508 258, TS.

¶12

Defendant

¶13

Counsel for the Carties:r/fu*
For the
Appticant ,i."s - -m nn IVasa Rao Chakrala
,:i .:r" Cf
For the Defendant ii.,, ,i ii' .k 2IFlllflftr -i : e-xoi ir e
i, i,..', ^ J,
&-,uE9'

¶14

(oA. No.278l202a)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2O,22,242l_ (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Two hundred and Forty Two only) (Rs.39,569.33ps + Rs.29,163.4ops +

¶17

19,53,508.69ps)with future interest @ 11.95olo p.afrom 25.05.2024 tilr the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated property as described in the schedule to OA.

¶18

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant avaired roan of Rs.20.00 rakhs for footwear business under the name and style of M/s. New South Land Footwear on 02.L0.2022. The defendant executed hypothecation agreement, letter of continulty, Interest agreement, demand promissory note etc. on 3r.t2.202r, the defendant avaired roan of Rs.3.00 rakhs and executed retter of undertaking, demand promissory note, retter of continuity, general term loan agreement and hypothecation agreement. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendant faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA and issued notice on

¶19

74.09 several requests and demands, the defendant
g. Hence this OA.
91ffi"";ffi;,'.t*N
;: :.trrsrn *
\ei ?
,2
WsY

¶20

(OA.N0.278/2024)

¶21

Defendant called absent and set exparte on t2.02.202s.

¶22

Sri Venkatapuram Srinu, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are

¶23

marked as Ex.A.1 to A.31.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

Defendant 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.31. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their clarm made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶28

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2O,22,242/(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Two d Forty Two only) (Rs.39,569.33ps + ns,z-$aas".ffis'eq ,53,5O8.69ps) with future interest @ 7t,.pso/o p.arFdin zs. o 4till the date of realization. ii 27ft1?fr5

¶29

'Niffi@Y,

¶30

(oA. No.278 12024)

¶31

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

The Applicant Bank is also entiiled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly,

¶36

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 27rh day of Feb, 2O2S)

¶38

sd/ - (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

?7 rf8m6

¶40

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Kumbham Nagesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Kumbham Nagesh

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 Mrs. Niharika Malapati

M S Sri Laxmi Priya Cotex versus Union Bank of India

Syed Sadiq Hussain and another versus State Bank of India

Gudilla Babu versus Urban Co. operative Bnak Ltd.

Pati Satya Narayana Reddy versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

Shaik Abdul Aleem versus Indian Overseas Bank