Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Ms. Bachu Soujanya

DRT7 Jan 2025OA/46/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery, the bank sought realization of an educational loan along with interest. The defendants were absent. The tribunal found the bank's claim substantiated by evidence and documents. The OA was allowed, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable for the debt, interest, and costs, with suit for realization of the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 34,61,929/- along with future interest and costs. The bank is entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' assets.

Union Bank of India versus Ms. Bachu Soujanya — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE 7rH DAy oF TANUARY,2o2s

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No,46 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, Narayanaguda branch, YMCA Campus, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, Telangana - 5OO 029. Rep by its Branch Manager

¶7

Applica nt

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Ms. BachuSoujanya, D/o B. Madhavi, aged 29 years,

¶10

Occ: doctor, R/o plot no.31,

¶11

D. No. 3- 1 12lA / 6/ 5, Bheem

¶12

Reddy nagar, Boduppal, Near fish building, Hyderabad-92.

¶13

Mrs B. Madhavi, W/o B. Sambasiva Rao,

¶14

Aged 47 years, occ: artist, R/o plot no.31, D.No.3-IL2/A/6/5, BheemReddynagar, Boduppal, Near fish building, Hyderabad_92. Defendants ,.,+i ---..i-l\ :TTi;i:ffir"h.,'\ sr DS PavanKumar For the Defendbnts 0 7 ,*n.^{lm,. ' l\ r'patt"} : !^,',- [.^-. '1i .. ^^:ii' r\ oft,oEn . ':,j\rrrrr(3i]J-7,...'ir,'.., .,.-,^-i!t-_": 1. rhe Apprican,";;-:;il+ present oA asainst Derendanrs ror recovery of a total sum of Rs.34,61,g29l_ (Rupees Thirty Four

¶15

(OA.No.46 of 2024)

¶16

Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Nine

¶17

only) with current and future interest @ t3.75o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of oA tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sale of mortgaged property as described in the schedure to oA.

¶18

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is the borrowerand defendant no.2 stood as coapplicant availed educational loan of Rs.18.00 lakhs and agreed to repay in 198 months from 2g.09.2022 @ Rs.31,152l_ p.m. Defendant no.2 deposited theRegd Sale Deed Doc No.9412 /2003 at SRO, Uppal dated 11.08.2003 and created equitable mortgage in favour of Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 29.t0.2023 and issued demand notice dated 03.7t.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendants 1 &2 called absent and set exparte on 10.09.2024.

¶20

Sri PrabhakarRao, BranchManager of the Applicant Bank examined ..' himself as AW;1 hibited relevant documents, which are -^{-.. a</sup> _- marteop,ta's exffi1 The defendants paid a sum of Rs. 4, 8!,st)/7 3ffft r,ilig.s}

¶21

(OA.No.46 of 2024)

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.9. 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 Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶26

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 sum of Rs.34,61 ,g2g/_ (Rupees Thirty Four Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Nine onry) with current and future interest @ 13.750lo p.a from date of oA till the date of rearizationLESS a sum of Rs.4,g1,5oo/-

¶27

paid by defendants ;

¶28

ffi-u>
.*
J- 'tl \t
R'ih,
@Mv,

¶29

(OA.No.46 of 2024)

¶30

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

¶31

The Applicant Ban k is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards rea lization of the debt due.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶36

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the Tthday of Jan, 2025)

¶37

sdl(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

ft-<br>: otulrr'a :
'kbt--i#

¶39

Union Bank of India v. Ms. Bachu Soujanya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Ms. Bachu Soujanya

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

Canara Bank versus M/s. Laksheya Group

M/S. Smith and Kenner Pharmaceauticals Private Limited versus Asset Reconstruction (India) Ltd. (Arcil)

City Union Bank Limited versus M/s. Kpg Projects

M Ravikumar Reddy versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S. Saa Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S. R.P. Industry