Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Rai Srinivas

DRT2 Jul 2025OA/87/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's OA for recovery of Rs.26,62,840/- with interest from three defendants. The Tribunal held the bank established its claim via a bank officer's evidence and documents, making the defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.26,62,840/- with 8.5% interest from 31.12.2023, plus costs; recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Rai Srinivas — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.S7 OF 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, Kothapalli Haveli Branch, Jagityal road, Karimnagar district, Telangana State - 505 451. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mr. Rai Srinivas, s/o Narsaiah, aged about 43 years,

¶10

occ: Truck driver, R/o H.no.1-205/A, Turpuwada, Kothapalli Haveli, Karimnagar district, TS - 505 451.

¶11

Smt. Rai Mamatha, w/o Mr. Rai Srinivas, aged about 41 years, occ: housewife, R/o H.no.1-205/4,

¶12

Turpuwada, Kothapalli Haveli, Karimnagar district, TS - 505 451.

¶13

Mr. ShanigarapuEshwara Prasad, S/o Venkateswarlu, aged about 47 years, Occ: employee, R/o h.No.12-ll, Old Super Bazar, Huzurabad, Erukalagudem, Karimnagar district, TS - 505 468.

¶14

Defendants

¶15

Pa rties:

¶16

Sri N.V. Subba Raju Expa rte

¶17

(oA.No.87 of 2024)

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Applicant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.26,62,g4ol_ (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Sixty Two thousand Eight Hundred and forty only) with further interest @ 8.500/o p.a t 20/o penar interest with monthry rests from 31.r2.2023 tiil the date of rearization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶20

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendants no.1 and 2 being the principar borrowers and defendant no.3 being the co-obrigant avaired housing roan of Rs.20.00 rakhs for construction of residentiar buirding and executed necessary roan documents on 2g.g.2017 in favour of Appricant bank. The defendants executed composite agreement date 29.0g.2017 and mortgaged the schedule mentioned property and deposited the originar tiue deed which was registered as document no.335g/2017. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank crassified the account as NPA and legal notice was issued on 0t.t2.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the

¶21

Hence this OA.

¶22

t r t$f:'tdFrt"e absent and set exparte on 09.06.2025.

¶23

(OA.No.87 of 2024)

¶24

Sri P. Kamalakar, Branch Manager of the Applicant^{Bank examined} herself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which^are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.7.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

Defendants remainedexparte. To substantiate^{the case of the} Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the^{Applicant Bank was examined} and she exhibited relevant documents^{as Ex.A1to A.7. In view of} the above, I hold that the Applicant^{Bank has established their claim} made in the OA against the^{Defendantsand hencethe ApplicantBank} is entitled to recover the^{claimmade in the OA with future interest} and costs.

¶28

B. In the result, the^present OA^is allowed^{with costs, as under:}

¶29

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.26,62,84Ol-^{(Rupees Twenty} s Sixty Two thousand Eight Hundred^{and forty only)}

¶30

'{f ,w',;}) erest @ 8.50%^p.a from 3L.12.2023^{till the date of} '* 11tl&1fi6 ? **.1$=z

¶31

(t u:. *t.fr;'*fV

¶32

(OA.No.87 of 2024)

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶38

14, Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶39

(Drctated to the P.A., transcnbed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on t rr-< the 7 ' day of .lu y, 2025)

¶40

sd/_

¶41

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶42

tr:ffi oiii,'xwleneaar

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Rai Srinivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Rai Srinivas

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

Banothu Nilima versus State Bank of India

Nagolu Gopal Reddy versus Union Bank of India

Karur Vysya Bank versus Sri. a. Sita Rama Rao

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

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Karengular Soumyalatha

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Mr. Ravvarapu Vishnu Vardhan