Allowed

Uco Bank v. Mohammed Abdul Khaliq

DRT9 Sept 2026OA/318/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an Original Application filed by UCO Bank for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 78,15,571.66 under Housing and Education term loans. With defendants absent, the court examined bank documents, found the claim substantiated under SARFAESI Act, and allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally ordered to pay Rs.78,15,571.66 with interest; entity to be compensated to proceed against mortgaged property; recovery certificate issued.

Uco Bank versus Mohammed Abdul Khaliq — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE Ogth DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA. No.318 OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

UCO Bank Banjara Hills Branch, Hyderabad

¶6

Represented by its Authorized Officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Mohammed Abdul Khaliq (Borrower), S/o.Mohammed Abdul Shukoor R/o. H.No.238/P, P&T Colony, SPL Block, Suncity, Golkonda Post,

¶10

Hyderabad.

¶11

Mohammed Abdul Malik^{(Co-Applicant)} S/o.Mohammed Abdul Khaliq R/o. H.No.238/P, P&T Colony, SPL Block, Suncity, Golkonda Post, Hyderabad

¶12

Mohammed Abdul Basith^{(Co-Applicant)} S/o.Mohammed Abdul Khaliq R/o.H.No.238/P, P&T Colony, SPL Block, Suncity, Golkonda Post, Hyderabad

¶13

*
0 3 srp ?irs
tdl

¶14

(oA. No. 318/2026)

¶15

Mohammed Abdul Bari (Education Loan Borrower) S/o. Mohammed Abdul Khaliq, R/o. H.No.238/P, P&T Colony, Bandlaguda Jagir. Hyderabad.

¶16

Smt. Ameena Khaliq (Guarantor) Wo.Mohammed Abdul Khaliq, R/o. H.No.238/P, P&T Colony, Bandlaguda Jagir, Hyderabad Defendants

¶17

Counsel for the parties : For The Applicant Dr. Shaik Faheemullah For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 08.09.2026 Pronounced on 09.09.2026 Upload in website on 09.09.2026

¶18

ORDER

¶19

¶20

Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for total sum of Rs.78,15,571.66. Ps. ( Rupees Lakhs Fifteen Thousand and Five Hundred and Paise Sixty Six Only) i.e a sum of - 09s5P

¶21

(oA. No. 318/2026)

¶22

(i) Rs.45,48,058.56 Ps. under the Housing Term Loan with future rate of interest @10.2% p.a with monthly rests from 01.06.2024 till the date of realization,

¶23

(ii) Rs.31,57,513.10 Ps. under the Education Term Loan with future rate of interest @11.75% p.a with monthly rests from 10.10.2024 till the date of realization.

¶24

and in default for sale of Mortgaged Property mentioned in the Schedule of Property to OA.

¶25

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendants availed Housing Term loan facility of Rs.44,00,0001 with interest and executed Loan Agreement dated 20.08.2013 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant no. 5 stood as a Guarantor in the loan facilities availed by the Defendants and executed Letter of Guarantee dated 20.08.2013 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in Schedule of property to OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 13.11.2013 and deposited Registered Sale Deed in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants availed UCO Education Term loan facility of Rs.16,00,000p.r ' with. tnterest and executed Agreement^for " r. .'. .1 ,. Educatiog Loan dited 03+.3€016 in favor of the^Applicant :', Banlc"After -av-aililg " "'! -tt1g loaa^j,facility, the^Defendants failed^to l. [l $ SrF^rnfi "- i: 1,, lr a:. i,l i', . .: ....^_,';:..,7 .l^-.'; . .-.,. ... .r;.-r.,"r,- i ti1.1i -:; . .,.,, , '" -,. : ,' i. .; .,.

¶26

(oA. No. 318/2025)

¶27

comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.07.2024 and issued Demand Notice dated 03.10.2024 under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Acl, 2002 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶28

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 08.09.2026.

¶29

Sri. Ankit Kaneja, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.20.

¶30

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶31

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶32

¶33

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant ar1l,zt$l',''of,fig1.al of the Applicant Bank was s'\ar examinI rrr l e wd andl-.tre extriOiied..ii&fevant documents as E r''''i r x.A.1 tolL' 1._!1Y0";a; i'.t .t'.,i1^t" "/!.!.1!Y't="^+1..:rsvqr -.^{-:, .,,r("r\ruurrrEr rLD dD} A.20. ln vr6weot the a6ove, r 'i*ii tnat the Appticant Bank has establishe,d :^{! rfheirgchirqtpnffif} i, h6. 1:, OA against the Defendants l|', and hencii the Applicant Bank .iS entitled to recover the claim 1.1...., :-^- made in tfr e, : OAbA with future.irtterdst.and costs

¶34

(OA. No. 318/2026)

¶35

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under :

¶36

The Defendants no. 1 to 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.78,15,571.66. Ps. ( Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs Fifteen Thousand and Five Hundred and Seventy One and Paise Sixty Six Only) i.e a sum of -

¶37

(i) Rs.46,48,058.56 Ps. under the Housing Term Loan with future rate of interest @10.2% p.a from 01.06.2024 till the date of realization

¶38

(ii) Rs.31,67,513.10 Ps. under the Education Term Loan with future rate of interest @11.75% p.a from 10.10.2024 till the date of realization.

¶39

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Mortgaged Property as mentioned in the schedule of Property to the OA towards realization of the debt due

¶40

to proceed against the person and no.^'l to 5 towards realization of the

¶41

u $

¶42

(OA. No. 318/2026)

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶46

Communicate a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶47

(Dictated to the P A. transcribed by her, corrected, signed and^pronounced by^mean the open^{court on} this theog'h day of Sep , 2026)

¶48

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRES!DING OFF!CER

¶49

,l,f ffi 'u<br>j IssEpzoz$ :
,,ii :{. o .. $J,
K,,h,rSy
\luPE'*I-I-7l

¶50

,LYP%,,
a"'t.dri,
e ? ?"./, H'/irsP..,l 8./r t

Uco Bank v. Mohammed Abdul Khaliq

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Mohammed Abdul Khaliq

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Vijay Kumar

City Union Bank Limited versus Vijaya Lakshmi

Bugga Naveen versus Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Canara Bank versus Mr. Ramavath Laxma and others

Piske Manohar versus Sreenivasa Padmavathico Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Mohan Abbugari versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.