Allowed

Bank of India v. Sri Mannepuli Santhosh Nag

DRT2 Jul 2025OA/387/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the Originating Application filed by Bank of India against a borrower seeking recovery of a home loan debt. The court found the bank's claim established due to NPA classification and allowed recovery with interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs.89,57,608.47 with 9% p.a. interest; Bank entitled to mortgaged property and Defendant's properties for realization; costs awarded.

Bank of India versus Sri Mannepuli Santhosh Nag — Cheque Dishonour | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 2NDDAY OF JULY' 2025

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESTDING OFFICER OA.No.387 of 2024

¶3

Between :

¶4

Bank of India, Bashirbagh branch, H.No.3-5-822 and 3-5_822/8, .G_round^{floor,Bashirbaghto} King Koti Main Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad _ 5OO 029. xepresented by its Chief Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Sri Mannepuli Santhosh Nag S/o Sri Guru prasad Mannepuli, l9^"9,9^49 Igqi.,^{occ: pvt emptoyee,} K/o H,No.12_5_85/3, SP nagar, Moosapet, Ameetpet, Hyderabad - 5OO 018.

¶8

Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the parties: For the Applicant

¶10

Smt P. Suseela Exparte

¶11

ORDER J^oz;urm ! .rfhe^{Appticant Ban$i;} ed the present OA against Defendant for m of Rs.89,57,6O9.47ps (Rupees Eighty gn Thousand Six Hundred Eight and paise

¶12

forty Seven only) with interest @ 9olo p.aplus penal interest @ 2olo

¶13

(OA.No.387 of 2024)

¶14

p.awith monthly rests from date of filing of OA tiil the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶15

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant availed Home loan facility of Rs.7g,36,930/_ for purchase of semi finished house against the equitable mortgage of schedule mentioned property. The defendant executed demand promissory note, bearer letter, request letter and agreement for home roan and retter of decraration etcin favour of appricant bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to crassify the account as NpA on 2g'06,2023 and issued possession notice dated 27'77'2023. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶16

Defendant called absent and set exparte on 09.06.2025.

¶17

Smt G.E. Keerthi, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as ,,r";''qgY :r't* 6 : so^{z,dllo?pru,-oI} unsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶18

Q,*d

¶19

(OA.No.387 of 2024)

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

prayed for?

¶23

7' Defendant cared absent and set exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.24. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Appricant Bank is enti,ed 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 Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.89,57,6o8.47ps (Rupees Eighty Nine Lakhs Fifty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Eight and paise forty Seven only) with interest @ 9olo p.a from date of firing of oA tiil the date of realization.

¶25

entitled to proceed against the mortgaged in the schedule to OA towardsrealization of

¶26

(OA.No.387 of 2024)

¶27

10' the Appricant Bank is arso entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶28

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

¶29

12' The Applicant sha, fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶30

I3. Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶32

(Dictated to the p.A., transcr corrected, sisned and pronounced by me in the open courr on this the 2"dday ", ;Jt,r1:!i;t

¶33

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶34

1'd<br>.,F
*
0l
JUI zffi
,. }
.S.lY,
:,fW

Bank of India v. Sri Mannepuli Santhosh Nag

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sri Mannepuli Santhosh Nag

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banothu Nilima versus State Bank of India

Nagolu Gopal Reddy versus Union Bank of India

Karur Vysya Bank versus Sri. a. Sita Rama Rao

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Rai Srinivas

.Mr.Syed Hajee Hussain and Another versus State Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Karengular Soumyalatha