Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Genex Tubing Solutions

DRT24 Apr 2025OA/223/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues from a corporate borrower and its partners. The Tribunal, recording the bank's witness evidence, held that the bank established its claim and is entitled to the principal amount, future interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the OA; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.39,01,648.39 with future interest and costs; Recovery certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Genex Tubing… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 24rH DAy OF ApRrL, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.223 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Beeramguda branch, H.No.9-77 (old no. 11-69) Beeramguda, Patancheru, Sanga Reddy district - 502 032. Rep by its Senior Branch Manager

¶6

Applica nt

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Genex Tubing Solutions, Represented by its partners, R/o Plot no.390, S.No.s 229 to 246, BN Reddy nagar colony,

¶9

Cherlapally, Hyderabad - 500 051.

¶10

Smtsarasija Lakkakula, w/o Sri Ramesh Kumar Lakkakula, partner of M/s. Genex Tubing solutions, /o^{Plot no.390,} S.No.s 229 lo 246, BN Reddy nagar colony, Cherlapally, Hyderabad - 500 051.

¶11

And

¶12

H. No. 5-9-240 / 7 / 648, Saili gardens, Yapral, Jawaharnagar,

¶13

Hyderabad - 500 083. And

¶14

Plot no.122, Phase-II, Sainikpuri, Medchal -

¶15

(oA.No.223 /2024)

¶16

SmtKonathamLavanya, w/o Sri K. Venkateswara Rao,

¶17

partner of M/s. Genex Tubing solutions, R/o Plot no.390, S.No.s 229 to 246, BN Reddy nagar colony, Cherlapally, Hyderabad - 500 051.

¶18

flat no.302, Jaya Arcade, Kamalanagar, ECIL post, Hyderabad - 500 062

¶19

And

¶20

P-288, 27 A, Vi naya knaga r, NearVayushakthinagar,ⁱ Keesara (M), Dammaiguda, Nagaram, Medchal, Malkajgiri- 83. Defenda nts

¶21

Counsel for the Parties:

¶22

For the Applicant Sri A.V.S.S Prasad

¶23

For the Defendants Exparte

¶24

ORDER

¶25

1' The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.39,01,64g.39ps (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs one Thousand six Hundred forty eight and paise Thirty nine only) i.e.,

¶26

a) A sum of Rs.20,59,531.39ps in cc loan account with future

¶27

interest @ 14.75o/o p.a with monthly rests from 01.05.2024 till

¶28

(oA.No.223/20241

¶29

b) A sum of Rs.1B,42,lU/- in Term loan account with future interest @ 14.50% p.a with monthly rests from 01.05.2024 till the date of realization ;

¶30

and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶31

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a firm represented by partners /defendants 2 &3 availed a cc rimit of Rs.15.00 rakhs and term roan rimit of Rs.20.00 lakhs on 07.rr.2020. The defendants executed declaration of partnership, general term loan agreement, hypothecation agreement, deed of guarantee etc. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank was constrained to classify the account as NpA on 03.05.2022 and issued legal notice dated 14.05.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶32

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 04.02.2025.

¶33

Mr. T. Applicant Bank examined himself AS

¶34

AW.1 documents, which are marked AS Ex.A.1

¶35

Heard cant Bank.

¶36

(oA. No.223l2024)

¶37

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?

¶38

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.A1 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.

¶39

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.39,O1,648.39ps (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs One Thousand Six Hundred forty eight and paise Thirty nine only) i.e.,

¶40

a) A sum of Rs.20,59,531.39ps in CC loan account with future interest @ 14.75o/o p.a from 01.05.2024 till the date of rea lization ;

¶41

b) A sum of Rs.18,42,117/- in Term loan account with future from 01.05.2024 till the date of

¶42

(oA.No.223/2]2al

¶43

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due;

¶44

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 & 3 and properties of defendants No.1 firms towards realization of the debt due.

¶45

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶46

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

¶47

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶49

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on thjs the 24th day of Aptit,2O2S)

¶50

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶51

7_ g ,.,q ?rys

¶52

ffi:ryH* {"&;1;, ..::.r, l,yDEfi.4Bro.

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Genex Tubing Solutions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Genex Tubing Solutions

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

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S. Sri Unnati Seeds

Idbi Bank Limited versus Sri. Haligi Ramesh

State Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Mahakali Motors

State Bank of India versus Salla Ram Reddy

State Bank of India versus Kannuri Kanaka Durga Prasad

State Bank of India versus M/S. Siri Mobiles and Electronics