Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. R.P. Industry

DRT8 Jan 2025OA/146/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of a term loan. The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application, holding that the bank established its claim and directed defendants to pay the outstanding sum with interest.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay Rs.71,06,851.36 with future interest @ 14.50% p.a. and allowing the bank to proceed against hypothecated securities of respondent-1 and properties of respondent-2.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. R.P. Industry — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrs rHE 8t' DAy oF JANUARY,2o2s

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.146 of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, Khammam main b ra nch, Khammam district.

¶7

Represented by its Senior Manager Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. R.P. Industry, Represented by its proprietor, # 1-38-3, Gudurupadu, Khammam district, TS-507 003.

¶10

Sri Chirra Mahesh, Prop: M/s. R.P. Industry, R/o H.no.1-38-3, Gudurupadu, Khammam District - 570 003. Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Pa rties:

¶12

For the Applicantthe ApplicantApplicant

¶13

For the Applicantthe ApplicantApplicant Keshpally Jhansi Rani For the Defendants Expa rte

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a t ,O6,851.36ps^(Rupees Seventy 6 One Lakhs Thou undred Fifty One and paise 'l:f Thirty Six , ; oh^{9f tv) [wPnrftl{'fffi t a narfutureinterest @ 14.50o/o p.a}

¶16

(oA.No.146/2024)

¶17

with monthly rests from date of application till the date of reallzation and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle AS described in the schedule to OA.

¶18

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a firm represented by its proprietor / defendant no.2 availed term loan of Rs.99.00 lakhs on 28.11,2019 for purchase of TATA Hitachi & Wire Dressing Machine for running excavator and executed Composite agreement, General form of guarantee, undertaking letter and other documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. The defendants also availed UGECLterm loan of Rs.19.00 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 2t.07.2020 and executed term loan agreement. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 27.10.2023 and issued recall notice dated 30.10.2023. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶19

Defendants I and 2 called absent and set exparte on 25.I1.2024.

¶20

Sri ChiefManager of the Applicant Bank
ffi*,
exa tm Sffi.s Xftf iE.1a exhibited relevant documents, which
rlx ('r':' ' s. ,.
,." \i
are iK h :Y a rked AS E;.A .1 to A.l,pi,,,
'5 {r I l'rt ]1r( l
ir
"
-a-'' , 2
'\ ,.1" ' '
.

¶21

(oA.No.146/2024)

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

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?

¶24

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.Al to A,15. In 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.

¶25

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.71,O6,g5l.36ps (Rupees Seventy One Lakhs Six Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty One and paise Thirty Six only) with current and future interest @ 14.50o/o p.afrom date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

The Appli to proceed against the hypothecated oroo"rd$, des ed in ule to OA towards rea lization of the

¶27

debt

¶28

(oA. No.14612024)

¶29

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^proceed against the^person and properties of defendant No,2 and^properties of^{defendant no.1} firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶30

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of^{the OA.}

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶33

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

¶34

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and^pronounced by^{mein theopencourton} this the Sthday of Jan, 2025)

¶35

sd/_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S. R.P. Industry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. R.P. Industry

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M Ravikumar Reddy versus Canara Bank

Union Bank of India versus Ms. Bachu Soujanya

Canara Bank versus M/s. Laksheya Group

State Bank of India versus M/S. Saa Enterprises

Arekatike Narsamma Arekatike Ashok versus Aptus Value Housing Finance India Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Sri Shaik Ibrahim