Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Shaik Abudl Sattar.

DRT2 Jul 2026OA/496/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte Original Application for recovery, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for Rs. 60,32,916.92 plus interest and costs against the defaulting defendants and mortgage properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 60,32,916.92 with future interest at 9.30% p.a.; contract against mortgaged and defendant properties allowed; recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Shaik Abudl Sattar. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-]I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O2ND DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 496 OF 2026

¶5

Union Bank of India., Seven Road Branch,21 - 32, NS Plaza Guntha Bazar, 7 Roads Circle, Kadapa-s16001. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.... .Applica nt.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Shaik Abudl Sattar., A Partnership Firm., Represented By its l4anaging Partner, Mr. Shaik Mohammed Naveed, Mrs. Shaik Mallika, Mrs. Shaik Feroja Sha heen, Survey No.351/1, D.No.8/187 WOW Hero Showroom, Almaspeta, Kadapa YSR District - 516001.

¶9

Mr. Shaik Mohammed Naved, S/o. Late S Abdul Sattar, Aged about 55 Years Occ: Business, Male, R/o. D. No.8/188- 1 Almaspeta, YSR Kadapa District-516001.

¶10

Mrs. Shaik Mallika, W/o. Shaik Mohammed Naveed, Aged about 46 Years, Occ: Business Female, R/o. D.No.8/188-1, Almaspeta, YSR District - 516001.

¶11

Mr. Shaik Feroja Shaheen, Wo. Late S Abdul Sattar, Aged about 83 Years, Occ: Business Male, R/o. D.No.8/188-1, Almaspeta, YSR District - 516001.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant

:Mr. V. Dyumani

Defenda nts

oA.NO.496/2026

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.60,3 2,916.92ps towards Term Loan A/c. No. 008616400000005 from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @13.80o/o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule properties.

¶20

Summons served on D1 to 4. They were set ex-parte on 25.06.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined Bhumireddy Sujana, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 22 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.22.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^perused the material placed on record.

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties?

¶25

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.22 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Baqk with future interest and costs. //X%* (J,',O-'

¶26

oA.NO.496/2026

¶27

In the result, the present Original Application No.496l2026 is allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.60,32,916.92ps towards Term Loan A/c. No. 008616400000005; with future interest @9.30o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs,

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

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 02"d Day of July, 2026).

¶35

ry,%#* (rffio* KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Shaik Abudl Sattar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Shaik Abudl Sattar.

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

Central Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Laxmi Agencies

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Fruitbros

Mustafa Gold And Jewelers versus Shriram Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus Venkatram

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Lubna Enterprises.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Wings On Wheels.