Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sri. M. Venkata Srinivas Rao

DRT27 May 2025OA/92/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On OA No.92 of 2025, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Union Bank of India's application against defendants who availed a housing loan and defaulted. The court held the bank entitled to recover the principal, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Injunction against defendants to pay Rs.62,73,412.70 with interest, costs, and authorizing recovery proceedings against mortgaged property.

Union Bank of India versus Sri. M. Venkata… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27rH DAY OF MAY, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GoPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.92 ot 2O2S

¶5

Between :

¶6

Union Bank of India, High Court Hyderabad branch, D.No.21-1-978 to 982, post Box no.616, Rikabganj, High Court, Hyderabad - 500 O02 Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Sri M. Venkata Srinivas Rao, s/o Sri M. Krishna Mohan, aged about 49 years, occ: business, R/o H.no.3- g-SgI/ I, sriBalajinagar, Mansoorabad, Saroornagarmandal, Ranga Reddy district, Telangana state.

¶10

Mrs. MadhaviMadala, w/o Sri M. Venkata Srinivas Rao, aged major, R/o H.No.3-9-59/t, Sri Balajinagar, Mansoorabad, Saroornagarmandal, rangareddy District, Telangana state

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the^parties;

¶13

For the Appli
*
.#P c-;'r
i 2?rN?ffi f,
3. o.s,
kUrr=,#

¶14

Sri S. Mujib Kumar Expa rte

¶15

(oA.No.92l202s)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1' The Appricant Bank filed the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.6Z,lg,4L2.7Ops (Rupees Sixty Two Lakhs seventy Three thousand Four Hundred Twerve and paise Seventy only) with subsequent interest @ 8,50o/o p.a from date of filing of oA till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant no.1 and 2 are husband and wife who avaired housing loan of Rs.49.00 lakhs on 30.11.2016 and agreed to repay in 282 EMIs of Rs.49,673/- p.m. The defendants executed housing loan agreement on 26.12.2016 and created equitable mortgage of schedure mentioned property. The defendants deposited the titre deed no/103r/20r7 dated 31.01.2017. After avairing the roan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA and notice was issued. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

set exparte on 15.05.2025.

¶20

(oA.No.92l202s)

¶21

Sri A. RajeswarRao, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶22

examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which

¶23

are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.15.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

Defendants No.1 & 2 remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.15. In view of the above, I hord that the Appricant Bank has estabrished thelr claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entiued to recover the craim made 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 No.1 and 2 are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.62,73,4lZ.7Ops (Rupees sixty Two Lakhs seventy Three thousand Four Hundred Twelve only) with subsequent interest @ of OA till the date of realization. !, "' , "- ir^' ?l:::': tie_ ,.3, .'';.."r.'' 'i''*:"2: \ -'-t.. \a_ -

¶30

(OA.No.9212025)

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A,, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2Tthday of l4ay, 2025)

¶38

sdl_

¶39

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶40

Union Bank of India v. Sri. M. Venkata Srinivas Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sri. M. Venkata Srinivas Rao

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

National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development versus M/S Navajeevan Organization

Kondaveeti Sita versus State Bank of India

Ms Mecwel Constructions Private Limited versus Canara Bank

Canara Bank versus Sri Qamar Ahmed Qureshi

Mr Vaddalapu Srinivas versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mr. P. Prem Kumar