Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Ewas Technologies Private Limited

DRT25 Apr 2024OA/1347/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues of approximately Rs. 64.90 lakhs. The court held that the claim was valid, within the limitation period, and unchallenged by the defendants who appeared ex-parte. The order permits recovery with interest and the sale of secured and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 64,90,494.17 with future interest of 9.05% p.a. and overdue interest of 2% p.a. from execution of the order of this Tribunal till application of the full amount realized by the sale of

Union Bank of India versus Ewas Technologies Private Limited — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th day of April 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA Hon’ble Presiding Officer

¶4

OA NO.1347/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India J P Nagar Cultural Association Branch

¶7

3^RD Cross, 19^TH A Main Road

¶8

2^ND Phase, J. P Nagar,

¶9

Bangalore - 560078

¶10

Represented by its Branch Head

¶11

Ms.Monica Kanwar. …APPLICANT

¶12

AND

¶13

EWAS Techonologies Pvt. Ltd.

¶14

A Company incorporated under the

¶15

Companies Act, having its office

¶16

At No. 563/1, Prerana Towers

¶17

Ranka Colony Road

¶18

Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road

¶19

Bangalore – 560076

¶20

MR.S.N.Ravichandra

¶21

S/o Sundaram Nagasubramanian

¶22

Aged 57 years

¶23

At No. 563/1, Prerana Towers

¶24

Ranka Colony Road

¶25

Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road

¶26

Bangalore – 560076

¶27

Chandrashekar. K

¶28

S/o Kannoji Rao S

¶29

52 years

¶30

At No. 563/1, Prerana Towers

¶31

Ranka Colony Road Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road

¶32

Bangalore – 560076

¶33

¶34

OA No.1347/2022

¶35

Raghuram.K S/o Krishnamurthy 45 years At no. 563/1, Prerana Towers Ranka Colony Road Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road Bangalore – 560076

¶36

Priya Ravichandra W/o S N Ravichandra Aged :- Major At No. 563/1, Prerana Towers Ranka Colony Road Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road Bangalore –560076. …DEFENDANTS

¶37

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶38

Applicant : Divya Purandar Defendant Nos.1 to 5 : Ex-parte.

¶39

FINAL ORDER

¶40

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 09-09-2022, under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.64,90,494.17/-(Rupees Sixty Four Lakhs Ninety Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Four and Seventeen Paisa Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing till realization from defendants.

¶41

The Application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed

¶42

under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

¶43

¶44

OA No.1347/2022

¶45

Brief facts of the case:

¶46

The present OA is filed by Corporation Bank and in view of amalgamation with Union Bank of India as per the Government Notification, the claim of Corporation Bank is continued by Union Bank of India.

¶47

The Defendant No.1 is the private limited company and Defendants No.2 to 5 are its directors, and 1^st Defendant company approached the Applicant Bank for working capital facilities for running its business and the 1^st Defendant company had availed various the credit facility called the Corp Liqui Plus with a total limit of Rs. 80,00,000/- viz. Rs. 60,00,000/- by way of working capital facility and Rs. 20,00,000/- being the Bank guarantee limits and the said working capital facility has been granted as per the terms and conditions of the sanction communication dated 09.01.2015, and the same has been duly acknowledged and signed by the Defendants. Further, the said credit facility has been granted against the security of the schedule property belonging to Defendant No.5.

¶48

The Defendants executed various loan and security documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including Demand promissory note dated 04.03.2015 for the total extent of Rs. 80,00,000/- along with the Take Delivery Letter dated 04.03.2015. In consideration of the said credit facilities, the Defendants also executed a common deed of hypothecation of movables/assets dated 12.01.2015 in respect of the total limit of Rs.

¶49

¶50

80,00,000/-.The 1^st Defendant represented by its 4^th Defendant has executed a General Power of attorney dated 23.01.2015 on behalf of the 1^st Defendant all payments due to the said Defendant. Thereafter it is submitted that the Defendants No.2 to 5 have guaranteed the repayment of the said loan availed in the name of the 1^st Defendant by way of guarantee agreement dated 04.03.2015.

¶51

The Defendant No.5 has created equitable mortgage in respect of the schedule property, by deposit of title deeds, by way of memorandum agreement dated 28.02.2015 registered. The Applicant disbursed to and the Defendants availed the said credit under the terms of Corp SME Liqui Plus (CSLPS) which is in the nature of a working capital facility. All the terms and conditions of the above said credit facilities including the repayment terms and re-phased repayment terms were duly accepted and agreed upon by the Defendants. The Defendants, as per the loan and security documents executed from time to time, were required to repay the principal amount with interest, further interest and overdue interest, accruing thereon at the rate and in the manner as per the terms mentioned in the aforesaid documents. The Defendant have acknowledged their liability towards the said account by way of Demand Promissory note dated 12.12.2017 in respect of the total limit of Rs. 80,00,000/-

¶52

The Defendants have not operated the account satisfactorily and not kept up with terms of the sanction in as much as the Defendants have failed to submit the necessary financial papers for the renewal of the said account

¶53

¶54

OA No.1347/2022

¶55

every year despite continuous follow up by the Applicant Bank. The Applicant Bank sending reminders notices to the Defendants calling upon them to comply and notices dated 21.02.2018 and 04.12.2019.

¶56

The defendants on account of non-submission of financial papers for the renewal of the working capital facility and on account of closure of unit, was classified as NPA on 01.04.2021. The Applicant bank issued Demand notice dated 09.04.2021. The Defendants have failed and neglected to repay the debts as demanded by the Applicant. The Defendants No.2 to 5 are the guarantors for the said loan facility and their liability is co-extensive to that of the Defendant No.1 and are thus liable towards the outstanding dues. The Defendant is liable to pay interest at the rate of interest to the Applicant Bank from time to time and the present rate of interest in 1^st Defendant's is @ 9.05% with monthly rests, with overdue interest of 2% p.a. Compound. T he Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after availing the loans, failed to repay the loan amount and committed default. However, there was no positive response from the defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶57

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants No.1 to 5 by RPAD on 24.01.2023 duly served, Acknowledgement produced. When OA was taken up on 20.06.2023, even after giving

¶58

¶59

OA No.1347/2022

¶60

sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendant Nos.1 to 5, hence, Defendants No.1 to 5 was placed ex-parte on 20.06.2023.

¶61

Heard the submissions of Counsels and perused the records.

¶62

To prove the case, Mrs.Monica Kanwar, W/o. Vinay Kumar, aged

¶63

about 38 years, Branch Head of the Applicant Bank, has filed Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A17. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶64

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied,

¶65

documents executed, the conduct and operations in the loan account and

¶66

the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a final order on the following terms:-

¶67

: O R D E R:

¶68

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶69

(a) The Applicant bank is allowed to recover from defendant Nos.1 to 5

¶70

jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.64,90,494.17 (Rupees Sixty Four

¶71

¶72

OA No.1347/2022

¶73

Lakhs and Ninety Thousand and Four Hundred and Ninety Four and Seventeen Paise only) as on 08.09.2022 (with interest calculated till 31.08.2022) along with future interest of 9.05% per annum with monthly rests, and overdue interest of 2% p.a with monthly rests, from the date of the application till realization.

¶74

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned properties in the OA;

¶75

¶76

d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movables and immovables) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶77

(e) The Applicant Bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to

¶78

¶79

OA No.1347/2022

¶80

prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by

¶81

defendants to the applicant bank.

¶82

(f) The Applicant Bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

¶83

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery

¶84

Officer in terms of the final order.

¶85

13. A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶86

[Dictated to the (GS), transcribed by him, corrected and signed by me on this the 25^th day April 2024].

¶87

Sd/-

¶88

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶89

ANNEXURES

¶90

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶91

AW-1: Malaru.S, Senior Manager Asset Recovery of the Applicant Bank.

¶92

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶93

Sl	PARTICULARS	EXHIBITS
No.
1.	Copy of Loan Application	A3
2.	Copy of Sanction communication dated 09.01.2015	A4
3.	Copy of Demand Promissory note dated 04.03.2015.	A5
4.	Copy of Take Delivery Letter dated 04.03.2015	A6
5.	Copy of Common deed of hypothecation dated 12.01.2015	A7

¶94

¶95

OA No.1347/2022

¶96

6.	Copy of General Power of Attorney dated 23.01.2015	A8
7.	Copy of guarantee agreement dated 04.03.2015 by defendant No.2-5	A9
8.	Copy of Memorandum Agreement dated 28.02.2015 registered as Document No.JAY-1-10279-2-14-15, stored in CD No.JAYD222, in the SRO Jayanagar along with the copy of sale deed dated 18.12.2004 deposited with the Bank	A10
9.	Copy of Demand Promissory note dated 12.12.2017	A11
10.	Copy of Take Delivery Letter dated 12.12.2017	A12
11.	Copy of Notice dated 21.02.2018 issued by the Applicant Bank	A13
12.	Copy of Notice dated 04.12.2019 issued by the Applicant Bank	A14
13.	Copy of Inspection report of the Applicant Bank	A15
14.	Copy of Demand Notice dated 09.04.2021	A16
15.	Certified extract of Statement of Accounts bearing No.565141000000636	A17

¶97

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶98

-Nil –

¶99

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶100

-Nil –

¶101

SCHEDULE PROPERTY

¶102

All that piece and parcel of property bearing Site No.1 formed in converted land in Sy.no. 27/2 (duly converted by Special Deputy Commissioner vide

¶103

Order no. B.Dis. ALN SR (S) 110/2004-05 dated 16.06.2004 measuring to

¶104

an extent of 5021 sq. feet out of which actual 3418.50 sq. feet in possession

¶105

¶106

OA No.1347/2022

¶107

out of total extent of 9 guntas or 9801 sq. feet situated at Kembathalli village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South taluk belonging to Defendant no.5, and bounded as follows:-

¶108

East by : Land belonging to Sri. Lankesh West : BDA Road North by : Land belonging to Sri. Narayanswamy South by : Site No. 2 and 3

¶109

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

Union Bank of India v. Ewas Technologies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Ewas Technologies Private Limited

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

Ms Associates Builders and Developers versus Punjab National Bank

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Kapil Petrolium Proprietary Firm of Shri Salimbhai Ismailbhai Hajiani

Yes Bank versus Vasrambhai

Union Bank of India versus Suresh

Indian Bank versus M/S R.L. Synthetics Store

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Prabha Filling Station