Allowed

Ms Avigna Mens Hostel v. Uco Bank

DRT11 Jul 2025SA/296/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DTII allowed a Section 17 application by the applicant, a tenant, directing the respondent Bank to hand over movable items from secured premises to the rightful owner subject to identification, a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the mortgagor, and an acknowledgement letter with no further claims.

What did the court decide?

The respondent bank is directed to hand over the movable items lying in the schedule premises to the rightful owner subject to identification, NOC from the mortgagor, and acknowledgement with 'no furt

Ms Avigna Mens Hostel versus Uco Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OFJULY, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

Securitization Application No. 296 OF 2O2S (ALONG WrrH r.A. No.1900 or jozs)

¶5

M/s. Avigna Men,s Hostel., Rep by its^proprietor Mrs. Banda Manasa, W/o.Naram Pabhan Kumar, Aged 34 years Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.6_20 Chennaraopet Mandal, Suripalle Warangal District.

¶6

.......Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

UCO Bank, Asset Management Branch Ground Floor, Navbharat Chambers Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶9

Rep by its Authorised Officer.

¶10

E. Prabhakar yadav, S/o. E.Mutyalu yadav Aged about 48 years, Occ: Business R/o.H. No. 1 -98/4/3, Vittalrao Nagar Madhapur, Shaikpet, Hyderabad.

¶11

E. Raju Yadav, S/o. E.Mutyalu yadav Aged about 44yearc, Occ: Business R/o. Plot No.1, Megha Hills, Madhapur Shaikpet, Hyderabad. (Respt. 2 and 3 are formal parties).

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. T.Sridhar Reddy Counsel for Respondent Bank : Mr. N.V.Subba Raju

¶13

-:ORDER:-

¶14

The Applicants filed the present Securitisation Application u/s 17 of the securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2OO2 (h%qinafter referred to as 0w"

¶15

Page 2 of 3

¶16

SA No.259/2024

¶17

"the Act") to^{direct the l't respondent bank to open the lock and key} of schedule^{properties and consequentlypermit the applicantto take} away their^{movablesfrom the scheduleproperties and to pass any} other order^{or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunalmay deem fit and} proper in the interest^{of justice'}

¶18

The averments^{of the application,briefly,are that the applicant} 2, is a tenant^{in the application scheduleproperty by virtue of rental} agreement^{dated 03.05.2024and is valid till 01'03'2027 however'} respondent bank^{forcibly took physicalpossession includingthe} movable items^{lying in the premises'}

¶19

The^{respondent bank filed reply statement in the SA' The} submissions^{thereof, briefly, are that due to defaultcommitted by the} borrowers i.e.,^{respondents2 and 3, the respondentbank classified} theaccountasNPAandinitiatedactionundertheAct,2002against the mortgaged^{property whichis the application schedule property'} Thephysica|possessionwastakenthroughadvocatecommissionerin CRL.MP'NoS.74and75l2o25'Theleasedeedpressedintoserviceis non est in law, as^{per judgement of Hon.ble High Court of Telangana} inM/s'BBREnterprisesVsCentralBankoflndiaandAnother(WRIT Petition No.1315/2020)'^{The respondent bank do not have any} objection in handing^{over the movables availablein the schedule} premises to its rightful owner. The^{same can be handed over only} upon identification of the^{tenant/rightfulownerof the movableitems} including NOC by the^{mortgagorand acknowledgement.}

¶20

With the consent of both^{parties,SA and lA 190012025 have} been heard and disposed^{of together.}

¶21

Both the Learned counsel for the applicant as^wellas respondent bank reiterated their version as in the application and reply statement. fr*P

¶22

Page 3 of 3

¶23

sA,No.269l2024

¶24

The limited purpose of the SA and IA is to direct the respondent bank to hand over the movable items lying in the application schedule premises to the applicant being tenant therein. The respondent bank has also expressed on objection to hand over the same to the rightful owner subject to conditions stated in Para 6 of the reply statement. Under such circumstances I find no impediment to allow the SA and IA. Accordingly the respondent bank is directed to hand over the movable items to the rightful owner subject to identification by the applicant herein and the borrower/mortgagor, NOC from the mortgagor and acknowledgement with 'no further claims' letter by the mortgagor/rightful owner of the movables/applicant herein.

¶25

In the result, the Securitization Application and IA tg00/2025 are allowed subject to above direction.

¶26

B. Consequently, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶27

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload in the official website.

¶28

(Typed to my dictotion by the ps, corrected, signed ond pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17'h doy of July, 2025).

¶29

S,v"

¶30

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Ms Avigna Mens Hostel v. Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Avigna Mens Hostel v. Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus Ms John Upvc Windowsand Doors

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sri Balaji Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus Seshadri Builders

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sumukh Paper and Paper Boards Private Limited.

Canara Bank versus Pundari in House Crafts Manship Homespun Food

Canara Bank versus Sri. K. Mallikarjuna Reddy