Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M.S. Globe Master Robes

DRT6 May 2025OA/311/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT-I Hyderabad allowed an original application for debt recovery filed by Union Bank of India against M/s. Globe Master Robes for a principal sum of Rs. 21,47,000/- with interest. The tribunal held that the exhibited documents proved the defendant's liability.

What did the court decide?

The defendant was ordered to pay Rs. 21,47,000/- with future interest. The applicant was entitled to proceed against hypothecated movables and other properties. A recovery certificate was issued.

Union Bank of India versus M.S. Globe Master Robes — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MAY/ 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.311 ot 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, PattabhiBhavan branch, Secretariat road, Hyderabad, Telangana State. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Globe Master Robes, Represented by its^proprietor, VemireddyMurali Krishna, aged 53^years, Occ: self employed, 5-9-13/20, Taramandal complex, Saifabad, Hyderabad - 500 004.

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Parties:

¶12

For the Applicant

¶13

Defenda nt

¶14

: Ms. Sangeetalaiswal : Sri A. Vijay Kumar

¶15

ORDER

¶16

1, The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant^for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2lt47,OOO/-^(Rupees Twenty^One Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand.. only) i.e.,

¶17

a) A sum ", sffiffiub7 \ under toan account
+ witd:ft
No.11791605 o{o#oc *i,&,$rr,rr" h\est @ 13.s0o/o p.awhich
F1
I o6r.rAyzrtrs *
fl1d.
n W','..,.-$iii ..

¶18

(OA. No.311/2023)

¶19

includes 2o/o penal interest from 23.08.2023 till the date of

¶20

realization;

¶21

b) A sum of Rs.6,90,000/- under loan account

¶22

No.117915010000001 with future interest @ 13.05% p.awhich includes 2o/o penal interest from 23.08.2023 till the date of rea lization ;

¶23

And in default for sale of hypothecated assets as mentioned in schedules to OA.

¶24

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant availed term loan of rs.13,50,000/- and working capital of Rs.9.00 lakhs vide letter of arrangement dated 14.06.202t. The loan is collaterally secured by hypothecation of machinery, stock and book debts as specified in the schedule to OA. The defendant executed demand promissory note, composite agreement, general term loan agreement, letter of undertaking, AD 02A dated 14.06.2021 and letter of continuity etc. It is submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendant has availed the said loan facilities and failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NPA on 20.01.2023. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendant has not regularized the account, and the Ap nk issued legal notice dated 29.04.2023 but the defe rward to repay the same. The total claim inst dant is of Rs.2L,47,OOO/- (Rupees b,fu t5[p5 Seven Thousand only) with future sq Jg/ 2 V$

¶25

(OA. No.311/2023 )

¶26

interest @ 13.50o/o p.aand @ 13.05% p.a with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization. Hence the OA.

¶27

The Defendant filed written statement and denied the averments made in OA. It is contended that the Applicant bank obtained the signatures of defendant on blank printed formats and is not aware of which documents he signed. The defendant denied the execution of hypothecation of schedule mentioned assets. It is further submitted that the Applicant bank did not give credits of payments in the statement of account and classified the account as NpA without following the RBI guidelines. Hence prayed for dismissal of OA. Defendant examined himself as DW.1 and not filed any documents.

¶28

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶29

Heard the arguments.

¶30

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶31

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has proved its claim as made in OA against the defendant ?

¶32

ii) To what relief ?

¶33

P"i,!F{#;ii}-,r}N

¶34

sri P. v#dderrisnn6) seniofhq\ r/ AW.l who was examined on oenarr^j'r +ne fi&rftAhfffi"urrrl posed about the liability of the

¶35

$t,- ,-d#

¶36

(oA. No.311/2023)

¶37

defendant. Exhibits A.1 to A.21 exhibited by the Applicant bank clearly establish the liability of the defendant.

¶38

7 . AW.1 was not cross examined by the defendant. Even though defendant examined himserf as DW.1, his evidence is in nowayherpfur to him. The defendant having taken the prea that the appricant bank did not folow the RBI guiderines and that the present oA was barred by rimitation, faired to prace any substantiar proof to that effect. Moreover, a perusal of the documents exhibited by the Applicant bank makes crear that ail the rerevant documents are executed by the defendants in the normar course of transaction. The defendant very vaguery contended that particurars made in the oA are not correct. But as per the statement of accounts, the defendant is riabre to pay the OA claim. Considering all the circumstances, I am of opinion that the defense taken by the defendant is not tenabre. Hence the appricant bank is entitred to craim the oA amount from defendant' Therefore, the oA craim deserves to be arowed against the defendant.

¶39

Point No.ii)

¶40

o In the result, the present original application is allowed with costs as under:

¶41

The Defendant is liabl plica nt Bank a total sum of Rs.2L,47,OOO/up€ Lakhs Forty Seven :tr' Thousand only) 0 6 firy 21fr

¶42

(OA. No.311/2023)

¶43

a) A sum of Rs.14,57,000/under loan account No.117916050000004 with future interest @ 11.50o/o p.a

¶44

from 23.08.2023 till the date of realization;

¶45

b) A sum of Rs.6,90,000/_ under loan account No.117915010000001 with future interest @ 11.05o/o p.a from 23.08.2023 till the date of realization;

¶46

The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedure to oA towards rearization of the debt due.

¶47

The Applicant bank is also entiUed to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards rearization of the debt due.

¶48

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

¶49

The Applicant bank shall file a cost memo within two weeks from

¶50

the date of receipt of order.

¶51

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶52

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶53

(Dictated to the p.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 6th day of May,2O2S)

¶54

sd/-

¶55

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

0 6 t'ilt rry3
i

Union Bank of India v. M.S. Globe Master Robes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M.S. Globe Master Robes

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

State Bank of India versus Sri. Shaswanth Kumar Gampala

Patlolla Venkateshwara Reddy versus Bank of Baroda

Patlolla Venkateshwara Reddy versus Bank of Baroda

State Bank of India versus M/S. Maxxtouch Imppex Indai Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Nandita Granites

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sree Nihar Industries