Allowed

Uco Bank v. Vinay Kumar

DRT29 Sept 2025OA/1339/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the original application filed by UCO Bank for an issuance of Recovery Certificate. The bank was granted permission to recover the principal amount plus interest at a reduced rate of 8% p.a. simple interest from the deceased borrower's legal heir.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.1,71,86,151.64 plus interest at 8% p.a. (Simple) from the filing date until realization.

Uco Bank versus Vinay Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1339/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

UCO Bank Bangalore Cantonment Branch, MG Road, Bangalore-560001 …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

Sri. Vinay Kumar S (Legal Heir of deceased borrower K K Haridas) S/o Sri. Shivaswamaiah and Sumithra R/at NO.05, 1^st Floor, Soubhagya Apartment, No.424/3, 16^th B Main Road, Behind Bhima Jewellery, 4^th Block Koramangala, Bangalore-560034 ...DEFENDANT

¶8

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶9

Applicant : Sri. K.R Parashuram MRP Legalis Defendant : Exparte

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶12

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶13

Rs.1,71,86,151.64 (Rupees one crore seventy one lakh eighty six

¶14

¶15

OA 1339-2024

¶16

thousand one hundred fifty one and paisa sixty four only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that Late K K Haridas was a deceased borrower with defendant as his legal heir had availed the Loan credit facilities of Rs.1,69,30,000/- (Rupees one crore sixty nine lakh and thirty thousand only) from the applicant bank for the purpose of Purchase of Property.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the deceased borrower executed necessary loan documents along with on demand promissory note, loan agreement and letters of revival in favor of the applicant bank.

¶19

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶20

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶21

¶22

OA 1339-2024

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 12.02.2025.

¶24

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶28

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶32

undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found

¶33

OA 1339-2024

¶34

¶35

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of mortgage as claimed by

¶36

the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶38

this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed by the deceased borrower for purpose of purchase of property and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal, in view of the OA can

¶40

be allowed with a reduced interest @8% p.a.(Simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.1339/2024, stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶43

sum of Rs.1,71,86,151.64 (Rupees one crore seventy one lakh

¶44

OA 1339-2024

¶45

¶46

eighty six thousand one hundred fifty one and paisa sixty four

¶47

only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple),

¶48

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same

¶49

to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶50

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendant personally and his other assets are liable to be proceeded against

¶51

for the balance amount to the extent of estate inherited by the deceased borrower.

¶52

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶53

which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶54

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this

¶55

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶57

in terms of this final order.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶59

OA 1339-2024

¶60

¶61

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16

¶62

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by

¶64

me in the Open Court, this the 29^th day of September, 2025].

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Sumith S, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1		Copy of the loan application submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A2	24.01.2023	Loan sanction letter
A3	29.05.2023	Death Certificate
A4	25.01.2023	On Demand Promissory Note in Form A-1 submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A5	25.01.2023	On demand Promissory Note in Form AHL-7 submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A6	25.01.2023	Revival Letter submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A7	25.01.2023	Loan agreement in form AHL-6 submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A8		Affidavit cum undertaking submitted by Sri. K K Haridas
A9	04.03.2023	Copy of MOTD
A10	01.12.2023	Recall notice
A11	18.12.2023	Demand notice sent to defendant u/s 13 (2) of SARFAESI Act

¶72

OA 1339-2024

¶73

¶74

A12	Copy of the statement of Accounts and
	banker’s certificate
A13	Copy of the bankers certificate

¶75

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶76

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Uco Bank v. Vinay Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Vinay Kumar

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

State Bank of India versus Raghavendra

Indian Bank versus Gowramma

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Mallikarjuna

Hdfc Bank versus Ram Lubhaya

Punjab National Bank versus Balwinder Singh

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sri Basavaraj