Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency

DRT15 Sept 2025OA/80/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 25,29,512/- from defendants via hypothecated assets. Court found defendants jointly and severally liable, allowed application, and directed issuance of Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 25,29,512/- with future interest; OA claim secured by hypothecated assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 1sTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 80 OF 2025

¶4

Union Bank of India., Vanasthalipuram Branch D.No. C175 & 176, Main Road Va nastha lipu ra m, Hyderabad Telangana - 500070. Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶5

..... Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sri Laxmi Agency., Rep by its^prop. Mrs.pathlavath Padma, Aged about 32^years Occ: Business, PIot No.39, Ground Floor, Venkatadri Nivas,^phase - II Nadergul Village, Balapur Mandat Ranga Reddy District - 501510.

¶8

Mrs. Pathlavath Padma, W/o.Sri Rambabu Aged about 32 Years, Occ: Business R/o. H.No.3-65, curramguda Village Nadergul, Balapur Mandal Ranga Reddy District - 501510.

¶9

... Defendants

¶10

counsel for the Applicant : M/s.s.shekhar Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-parte

::^qLLE& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.25.29,5121- frcm the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @13olo p.a. from the date of /)w'n"'o"f

¶15

¶16

oA.NO.80/202s

¶17

application till the date of realization along with costs and tn default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶18

Summons served on D1 through paper publication, whereas summons served on D2. They were set ex-parte on IO.07.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined S.Srinivas Rao, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A.1to Ex. A.12.

¶20

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed through merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assets2

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.80/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severalty liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of ffi"*

¶26

oA.NO.80/2025

¶27

Rs.25,29,512l- with future interest @11olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶29

iii) the applicant bank is also entiUed to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 15th Day of September, 2025).

¶34

fu**

¶35

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Harini Trading Company

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Pranav Sai Agencies

M/S. Uco Bank versus Tarakarama Educational Society

Canara Bank versus Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Krishna Marketing