Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Alvala Rama

DRT2 Feb 2026OA/561/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Origin Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs.46,60,360 along with future interest against the defendants and a firm. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable based on documents exhibited by the bank’s authorized witness. The bank was ordered to issue a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs.46,60,360 with future interest at 12.75% p.a.; striking out defendants' defense; issuing recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Alvala Rama — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

!N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE O2Nd DAY OF FEBRUARY,2026 PRESENT: SRI cUMMADI cOPICHAND, PREStDtNG OFFTCER

¶2

OA. No.561 OF 2025

¶3

Between : Union Bank of lndia, Kothi Rampur Branch, 822159, #8-6-10, Near Pochamma Temple, Kothirampur, Karimnagar - 505 001, T.S Represented by its Branch Manager

¶4

Applicant

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

Mrs. Alvala Rama, Wo. Shanthi Kumar, Aged 34 years, Female, # 1-20, Madudha, Karimnagar, Telangana State - 505 472.

¶7

Mr. Alvala Shanthi Kumar, S/o. Lachaiah, Aged 37 years, Male, # 1-20, Madudha, Karimnagar, Telangana State - 5OS 472.

¶8

(oA. No. s61l202s)

¶9

M/s. Gmmco Limited, CK Birla Group, Kura Homes, 7th Floor, # 1-11-254, Sardhar Patel Road, Motilal Nehru Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad - 500 016

¶10

Also at - Survey No. 17, Anmagal, Hayathnagar, T.S. 50'1 505

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the parties :

¶13

For The Applicant Srinivasa Rao Chakrala For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 21.01.2026 Pronounced on 02.02.2026 Upload in website on 02.02.2026

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.46,60,360.00 ps. (Rupees Fofi Six Lakhs Sixty Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty re interest @12.75o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of realization and in default for sale of

0 2 rrg zBzE^* ?

)

'13r*r4W

(oA. No. s61l202s)

Hypothecated Vehicre and coilaterar security as mentioned in the Schedule^properties to OA.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendants avaired roan facirity of Rs.60.00 Lakhs repayabre in^gl equated monthry instailments with interest @12.75%^{p.a with} monthly rests and executed Term Loan Agreement dated 10.08.2023 in favor of the Appricant Bank. The defendant hypothecated vehicre along with collaterar security morefully mentioned in Schedule to properties to OA and executed Hypthecation vehicres sD - 1o dated 10.0g.2023 and Letter of Undertaking dated 10.08.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant No. 2 stood as a Guarantor and executed Letter of Guarantee dated 10.08.2023 in favor of the Appricant Bank. After avairing the roan facirity, the defendants faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank classified the account as NpA and issued Recail Notice dated 1 1.og.2o2s to the defendants. rnspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶22

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 21.01.2026.

¶23

Sri. Adepu Kiran Kumar, Authorized Officer of the Applicant ined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.33. * [ 2 FEB 202$

¶24

(oA. No. 551/202s)

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶26

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?

¶27

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.33. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶28

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

¶29

The Defendants No. 1 to 3 are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.46,60,360.00 Ps. (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Sixty Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty Only) with future interest @12.75Yo p.a from 25.102025 till the date of realization.

¶30

The Applicant Bank entitled to proceed against the and Collateral Security as mentioned in the to the OA towards realization of the debt due. 02 FF-B rt1fr^* --,.ltr

¶31

(OA. No. s6U202s)

¶32

The Applicant Bank is also entitled^{to proceed against the} person and properties of Defendants No.^{1 and 2 and} properties of Defendant no. 3 firm^{towardsrealizationof the} debt due.

¶33

That Applicant^{Bank is entitledto the costs of the OA'}

¶34

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

¶35

lssue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly.}

¶36

Communicate a^{copy of the order to the partiesconcerned'}

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed^{by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on} this the O2"d^{dayof Feb, 2026)}

¶38

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

,w*
$."?*f,

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Alvala Rama

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mrs. Alvala Rama

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

State Bank of India versus Ms.Parsi Rohini

M/s Surex Auto works versus Origo Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Sree Krishna Tractors versus Punjab National Bank

State Bank of India versus Sri Muramalla Mahesh

State Bank of India versus Sri. Durgam Ramesh

Bank of Baroda versus Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Private Limited