Allowed

Uco Bank v. Smt . Kothur Divya

DRT24 Oct 2025OA/390/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application by UCO Bank seeking recovery of a dues of Rs. 43.37 lakhs with interest from two respondents who availed cash credit but defaulted, upholding the banks evidence and liability.

What did the court decide?

The respondents ordered to pay Rs. 43,37,266.88 with 10.25% p.a. interest; bank entitled to sell hypothecated movables and proceed against respondent properties; recovery certificate issued.

Uco Bank versus Smt . Kothur Divya — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 24rH DAy OF OCTOBER,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.39O of 2O25

¶4

Between:

¶5

UCO Bank, Abid Circle Branch, #5-8-600 to 604, 1st floor, Mubarak Bazar, Abid Circle, Hyderabad - 500 001. TS. Represented by its Chief Manager Cum Authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Smt Kothur Divya, Sole Proprietrix of M/s. Sri Nalini Traders, # Plot no.206,

¶9

D. No. 5-9-VI0014, Vishaka nagar, Almasguda village, Balapur Mandal, Hyderabad - 500 058.

¶10

Also at:

¶11

#H.No. 13-205/1, ground floor, Vishaka nagar, Almasguda village, Balapur mandal, Hyderabad - 500 0SB.

¶12

Smt Kothur Divya,
w/o Sri Malkannagari Vignan Reddy,
aged major, occ: business,
H.No.13-205/1, ground floor,
Vishaka nagar, Almasguda village,
Balapur mandal, Hydgraba!,- 500 058.
4'.:' -.- -.. ...'.1:.-
Also at
" i' .o....-t ' , r-_....'i,.,,.-
-t"'b<br>H'No's-L-7{ii'gt."", na+,
i iH:,:. ffit 5:llf.'idl;'rm. .il}
. ...'i.. . ,.s i\ .:':1' .,.t1ij.:.- ..
',;.,;{,. ll :,. : "',,;:,' i'
..L----":/.J-if i;r.jr

¶13

(oA.390 of 202s)

¶14

Also at:

¶15

H.No.5-1-701, Bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad -500001.

¶16

Defendants

¶17

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Smt A. Nandini Reddy For the Defendants Exparte Reserved on 23.t0.2025 Pronounced on 24.t0.2025 Uploaded in website on 24.L0.2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against Defendants^for recovery of a total sum of Rs.43,37,266,88ps^(Rupees Forty Three Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six and^paise Eighty Eight only) with future interest @ 10.25%^p.a with monthly rests from 01.08,2025 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶20

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.2 is the sole^proprietrix of defendant^no.1 firm^availed cash credit of.Rs.50.00 lakhs and executed necessary documents.^To secure defendants executed composite deed ofh the schedule movables in favour of avdiling the loan facilities, the defendants

¶21

(oA.390 of 202s)

¶22

failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.04.2025 and recall I notice was issued on 30.04.2025. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶23

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 77.L0.2025.

¶24

Sri B. Murali Krishna, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.13.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶26

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?

¶27

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.13.^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

¶28

i nte rest a n d-94#r..:.'l:.;^. /'#';;''^{l';i: ':::'}

¶29

// 6-^{';t' ''*ilt,r.}

¶30

B.
In the fsft, tne Sent oA9is'+tttowed with costs, as under:
{i: z I ocT zs25 "iil
\'A . - {:"'i
}.;-l"fr:_ "sf ii,ri
*l'., i i '.trr.,r.,tt'':1i7'
,*7g;t,tti'"$'
-$i==:#.

¶31

(oA.390 of 202s)

¶32

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.43,37,266.ggps (Rupees Forty Three Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Six and paise Eighty Eight only) with future interest @ 10.25% p.a from 01.08.2025 tiil the date of reatization.

¶33

9' The Appricant Bank is entitred to proceed against the hypothecated movabres as mentioned in the schedure to oA towards rearisation of the debt due.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

13, Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

{j"T^.I:b:d^{byher,corrected,signedand pronouncedby mein the opencourt} on

¶40

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

Uco Bank v. Smt . Kothur Divya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Smt . Kothur Divya

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

Sri Durga Bhavani Polymers versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Shravya Agencies versus Indusind Bank Limited

K Sarojana versus Apsfc

State Bank of India versus Dhaanwick Agro Mills

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sujatha Spices

P Devender Rao versus Union Bank of India