Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sri. Muppana Nagesh

DRT26 Mar 2025OA/51/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

OA filed by a bank for recovery of an housing loan defaulting amount. Defendant remained in ex-parte. Tribunal verified the claim was substantiated by bank officials and documents, ignoring the admitted partial recovery. Bank allowed with recovery certificate and costs.

What did the court decide?

OA allowed. Defendant to pay Rs. 41,25,322.54 plus interest @ 9.85% p.a. from 17.02.2024 less Rs. 37,05,600 recovered. Recovery certificate issued.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sri. Muppana Nagesh — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 26THDAY OF MARCH'2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.51 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank, Naidupet branch, Bishop's House, Naidupet, Khammam - 507 003. Represented by its Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri l"luppanaNagesh, s/o Gandhi, aged major, male, MV Palem, Khammam Rural mandal, Khammam dist Telangana - 507 003.

¶10

Also at

¶11

First floor, Plot no.1, Survey No.133 & 133/A, Pollepalli village, Khammam Rural, Khammam dist- 507 003.

¶12

Also at

¶13

Plot no.05, Venkataraonagar, Kukatpalli, Near Narayana Coaching centre, Hyderabad - 72.

¶14

Defenda nt

¶15

Counsel For the lu ri Krish nam Raj u o": For the^{ii::"".:".""ffi%} Defendant '* ' E^} e i{^26ilAnzl[t : W**#

¶16

(OA.No.51/2024)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.41,25,322.54ps (Rupees Forty One Lakhs Twenty Five thousand Three Hundred Twenty Two and paise Fifty four only) with interest @ g.B5o/o p.awith monthly rests from 17.0r.2024 tiil the date oF rearization and in defaurt for sale of mortgaged properties as described in the schedure to oA.

¶19

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant avaired housing roan to the tune of Rs.35.00 rakhs vide retter of sanction dated 04.06.2018. The defendant executed demand promissory note, term loan agreement, letter of undertaking etc and agreed to repay the loan in 300 monthly instalrments of Rs'28,419/- each. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendant faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 28.06.2022 and issued demand notice on 17.72.2022. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶20

Defendant called abser 5.08.2024. -.,i

¶21

(oA.No.sU2024)

¶22

Sri Chintala Hari Babu, Manager^{of the ApplicantBankexamined} himself as AW.1 and exhibited^{relevant documents,which are} marked as Ex.A.1 to A.11.^{The Applicant bank filed part satisfaction} memo stating that a^sum of^{Rs'37,O5,60,0/-was recoveredthrough} sale of mortgaged Property.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank.}

¶24

The point that arise for^{consideration is whether the ApplicantBank is} entitled for the claim^{made in the OA against the Defendantas} prayed for?

¶25

Defendant remained exparte.^{To substantiate the case of the} Applicant Bank, AW.1,^{official of the Applicant Bank was examined} and he exhibited^{relevant documentsas Ex.A1 to A.11' In view of} the above, I hold that^{the Applicant Bank has established their claim} made in the OA against the^{Defendantand hence the ApplicantBank} 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 Defendant is liable to^{pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of} (Rupees Forty One Lakhs Twenty^Five

¶27

tHDU undred Twenty Two^{and paise Fifty four}

¶28

,"only) with int€ B.B5o/o p.afrom 17.0L.2024^{till the date of} .", i i

¶29

,^{z n fiAR2[25}

¶30

(oA.No.s1l202a)

¶31

realizationLESS a sum of Rs.37,O5,600/- recovered from sale of

¶32

property.

¶33

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶34

property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶40

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me an the open court on this the 26thday of March, 2025)

¶41

sdl(G. coPtCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶42

rRuE^coP)
,p7aeo
",$lif"iffiHo'

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sri. Muppana Nagesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Sri. Muppana 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Monish Fuel Station

Canara Bank versus Sanaa Audio Visual Productions Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Yashoda Krishna Automobiles Private Limited

Union Bank of India versus M/S. v. Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Lakshmi Enterprises

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S. Rajendra Paper Corporation