Allowed

Uco Bank v. Smt. Pulimamidi Kavitha

DRT5 Aug 2025OA/306/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a term loan of Rs. 48.63 lakhs. The bank proved its claim through documentary evidence, and the defendants remained absent.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants directed to pay Rs. 48.63,000+ interest; Recovery certificate issued; Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties.

Uco Bank versus Smt. Pulimamidi Kavitha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶3

PRESENTI SRI GUMMADI GoPIcHAND, PRESTDING oFFIcER

¶4

OA.No.3O6 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

UCO Bank, Koti branch, D.No.5/1/908, Pushpanjali complex, putlibowli Koti, Hyderabad - 500 095. Represented by lts Sr Manager Muthorised officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

SmtPulimamidiKavitha, Female, Wo Sri p. Vijay Reddy, Aged major, occ: business, Plot no. 115, H.No.4-70/ t/2, East Gandhi nagar, Rampally X road, Nagaram village, Keesarmandal, Medchal -Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad - 500 093.

¶10

Also at

¶11

Plot no.C-13, part (South side) Dammaiguda, H/o Nagaram village, Keesarmandal, Medchal -Malkajgiri District, Hyderabad - 500 093.

¶12

Mr. Pulimamidi Vijay Reddy, s/o Sri^p. yadi Reddy, aged major, occ: business, male,

¶13

Plot no. 1 15, H.No.4-7 O/ I /2, East Gandhi nagar, Rampally X road, Nagaram village, Keesarmandal, Medchal -Malka District, Hyderabad - 5OO 083.

¶14

(oA. No.306/2024)

¶15

Also at

¶16

Plot no.C-13, part (South side) Dammaiguda, H/o Nagaram village, Keesarmandal, Medchal -Malkajg'iri District, Hyderabad - 5OO OB3.

¶17

Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the^parties:

¶19

For the Applicant

¶20

For the Defendants

¶21

Smt A. Nandini Reddy Exparte

¶22

ORDER

¶23

1' The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.S4,24,134.39ps (Rupees Fifty Four Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand One Hundred Thirty four and paiseThirty Nine only) with future interest @ 8.75% p.a with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2o/o p.a from 1g.07.2024 till the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶24

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants land 2 are wife and husband who avaired term roan of Rs.48,63,000/- in 2019 and created equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds on t2.O9.2}tg bearing sate deed doc.No.16029/2019 more fffibffi$ schedute to oA. After avaiting the toan racit'p{$e a;;ffi"il?d,o compry the terms or sanction, hence accounr as NpA on 27.06.2024 and thefbrhricaptfiBf ffff',r iih" t;,'i '-4 - r. 4.tql :. --r^{. i.} ^d^'+rt r'r .S/,:', I, 1,..\rnrr#ax5$ir.ai,l-.r-5',if² i>*

¶25

(oA.No.30G/202a)

¶26

recall notice was issued on 28.06.2024.Inspite of several req uests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶27

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 17.07,.2025.

¶28

Ms. B. Neeta Shyam, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.14.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

prayed for?

¶33

Defendants remained 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. 14. 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 entifled to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶34

B. In the result,: ,::i,t is allowed with costs, as under: The severally liable to pay to the Applicant

¶35

Bank'a totalflrt8f 34.39ps (Rupees Fifty Four Lakhs

¶36

(oA.No.30G/2024)

¶37

Twenty Four Thousand One Hundred Thirty four and paise Thirty Nine onty) with future interest @ 8.75olo p.a from 19.07.2024 tiil the date of realization;

¶38

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶39

property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of

¶40

the debt due.

¶41

The Applicant Bank is also entiUed to proceed against the person

¶42

and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

The Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the oA.

¶44

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

¶45

of receipt of order.

¶46

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned. Iffflitjt*"iii |;iii:?tf#. bv her, corrected, sisned and pronounced by me in the open court on

¶48

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶49

ffi,,,

¶50

Uco Bank v. Smt. Pulimamidi Kavitha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Smt. Pulimamidi Kavitha

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

State Bank of India versus Miss Kurrapati Swarna Latha

Mrs Harriet Francis Dass versus Gic Housing Finance Limited

C Rama Devi versus Apsfc

Canara Bank versus M/S. Chaitanya Powerloom Industry

State Bank of India versus Mr. Brahmosthava Industries

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Mln Industries Private Limited