Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sukumar Mohan

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/1579/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application seeking a Recovery Certificate under the RDB Act, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the bank against a borrower and guarantors who defaulted on loans and failed to appear. The court reduced the interest rate to 12% p.a. and directed issuance of the certificate for execution.

What did the court decide?

Issued Recovery Certificate for Rs. 23,40,553/- with 12% p.a. interest to be recovered from defendants jointly and severally from their assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sukumar Mohan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 23^rd Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.1579/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India (erstwhile Corporation Bank) Mudradi Branch, No.205, 2B, Someshwar Road, Mudradi Karkala Taluk, Udupi District-574104

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sukumar Mohan S/o Late Mohan Sri Devi Pathri alias Mohan Poojary R/at Devi Pathri Nilaya, Natkadoor, Mudradi Village & Post, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District-576101

¶10

Twinkle Tom S/o Tom Thomas R/at: Nellikatte House, Mudradi Village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District-576101

¶11

Manjunath Hegde S/o Sadhu Hegde R/at: Sri. Durga Ganesh, Balladi Village, Mudradi Village, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District-576101

...DEFENDANTS

OA 1579-2023

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : M.R. Rajini Defendants : Exparte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,40,553/- (Rupees twenty three lakh forty thousand five hundred fifty three only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is the borrower and defendants No.2 to 4 as guarantors had availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶20

I. Demand Loan of a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only),

¶21

II. Term loan limit of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only), and

¶22

III. Term Loan limit of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only).

¶23

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with demand promissory note, guarantee

¶24

¶25

OA 1579-2023

¶26

agreement and deed of hypothecation in favor of the applicant bank.

¶27

It is further contended that, the defendants 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.

¶28

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.

¶29

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 29.01.2025.

¶30

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-38 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered

¶32

the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶33

OA 1579-2023

¶34

¶35

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶36

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶37

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶38

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶39

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶40

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶41

remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶42

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶43

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶44

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

¶45

OA 1579-2023

¶46

¶47

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶48

are availed by defendant No.1 for Business Purpose and also that

¶49

OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate,

¶50

this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @12% p.a.(Simple).

¶51

In the result, OA.No.1579/2023, stands allowed,

¶52

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶53

sum of Rs.23,40,553/- (Rupees twenty three lakh forty thousand

¶54

five hundred fifty three only) consisting of:-

¶55

a) Rs.3,74,180/- (Rupees Three Lakh Seventy Four Thousand

¶56

One Hundred and Eighty Only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple),

¶57

b) Rs.1,90,861/- (Rupees one lakh ninety thousand eight hundred sixty one Only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple) and

¶58

c) Rs.17,75,512/- (Rupees seventeen lakh seventy five thousand five hundred and twelve Only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple).

¶59

OA 1579-2023

¶60

¶61

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶62

personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the defendants jointly severally, personally and from their assets including the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶63

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶64

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

¶65

receipt of the order.

¶66

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

¶67

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶68

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

¶69

in terms of this final order.

¶70

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶71

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

¶72

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶73

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

¶74

me in the Open Court, this the 23^rd day of September, 2025].

¶75

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 1579-2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶80

AW-1: Karthik C. Naik, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶81

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶82

The Documents are appended in this order.

¶83

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

¶84

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Sukumar Mohan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sukumar Mohan

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

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sri Acha Shirishaila

Punjab National Bank versus G Krishnamurhty

Icici Bank Limited versus Svb Infra Projects

Canara Bank versus Veena Shetty

Union Bank of India versus Munivenkate Gowda

State Bank of India versus Rahul