Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Safewud Industries India Pvt. Ltd.

DRT21 Oct 2025OA/341/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate against defendants seeking issuance of a certified copy of the decree for outstanding term loans, UGECL term loans, and FITL loans, reduced interest rate of 10% simple, permitting recovery against joint and several liability and schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for aggregate sum of Rs. 5,72,49,704/- plus interest @10% p.a. simple recoverable from defendants jointly, severally & personally and against schedule property.

Union Bank of India versus Safewud Industries… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 21^st Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.341/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India, (Earlier Andhra Bank) Jayanagar 4^th Block Branch, No. 487, 32^nd “E” Cross, 19^th Main, 4^th “T” Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru 560 041, Represented by its Principal Officer and Branch Manager, Rosana Beegam. S W/o Mr. Saji P.S. Aged about 45 years.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Safewud Industries India Pvt. Ltd, Directors: Shailesh Pooncha and Sujaya Anil. Regd. Office: No. 1035, 4^th “M” Block, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru 560010.

¶10

Shailesh Pooncha, S/o Mohan Pooncha, Aged about 46 years. Flat No. 2, No. 88, Kathimaramma Nilaya, 1^st Cross,

¶11

OA 341/2023

¶12

¶13

Behind Prestige Motors, Kethamaranahalli, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru 560010.

¶14

Sujaya Anil, W/o Late K.M Anil, Aged about 58 years, No. 2031, HIG 3^rd Phase, 4^th “B” Cross, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru 560064.

¶15

Anusha K. Anil, D/o Late K M Anil, Aged about 30 years, No. 2031, HIG 3rd Phase, 4th “B” Cross, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru 560064. 5. Grishma K. Anil, D/o Late K M Anil, Aged about 33 years, No. 2031, HIG 3rd Phase, 4th “B” Cross, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru 560064.

¶16

...DEFENDANTS

¶17

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶18

Applicant : M.R Rajini Defendants : EXPARTE

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under

¶21

OA 341/2023

¶22

¶23

section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 5,72,49,704/(Rupees Five Crore Seventy Two Lakh Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶24

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed Term loan of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore Only), UGECL term loan of Rs. 75,80,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakh Eighty Thousand Only), funded interest term loan of Rs. 9,72,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Seventy Two Thousand Only).

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with demand promissory note and memorandum of deposit of title deeds.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 23.01.2025.

¶29

OA 341/2023

¶30

¶31

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-32 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶32

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

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶35

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶36

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶37

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants 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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶39

OA 341/2023

¶40

¶41

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of

¶42

the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶44

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 10.00% (simple).

¶45

In the result, OA.No.341/2022, stands allowed,

¶46

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶47

5,72,49,704/- (Rupees Five Crore Seventy Two Lakh Forty Nine Thousand

¶48

Seven Hundred and Four Only) with further interest @10.00 % p.a.(simple) which consists of:-

¶49

a) Rs. 4,83,58,696/- (Rupees Four Crore Eighty Three Lakh Fifty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Six Only) in term loan from the date of

¶50

filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received

¶51

during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property.

¶52

b) Rs. 81,54,740/- (Rupees Eighty One Lakh Fifty Four Thousand Seven

¶53

Hundred and Forty Only) in UGECL term loan from the date of filing OA

¶54

till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally,

¶55

after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the

¶56

OA 341/2023

¶57

¶58

pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property.

¶59

c) Rs. 7,36,268/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Eight Only) in FITL Loan from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & 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 proceeding against the defendant jointly, severally & personally and also against their assets. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶60

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank in term loan and UGECL term loan, the defendants jointly, severally & personally and their assets are liable for amounts due under the loan account.

¶61

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶62

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶63

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶64

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶65

OA 341/2023

¶66

¶67

of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure)

¶68

Rules, 1993.

¶69

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the

¶70

Open Court, this the 21^st Day of October, 2025].

¶71

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶72

PRESIDING OFFICER ANNEXURES

¶73

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶74

AW-1: S.K. Vasantha Kumar S/o Karuppaiah, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶75

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶76

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	29.10.2018	Loan application
A2	31.10.2018	Sanction letter
A3	14.11.2018	Composite agreement
A4	15.11.2018	Supplement to composite agreement
A5	15.11.2018	General form of guarantee
A6	01.12.2018	General form of guarantee
A7	15.09.2020	Inter office memo
A8	15.09.2020	Demand promissory note
A9	15.09.2020	General term loan agreement
A10	--	Letter of continuity
A11	15.09.2020	Supplement agreement
A12	15.09.2020	Letter from the director
A13	15.09.2020	Letter of guarantee
A14	15.09.2020	Letter from the director
A15	30.01.2021	General term loan agreement
A16	30.01.2021	Letter of undertaking
A17	30.01.2021	Letter from the directors
A18	03.04.2021	Letter of continuity
A19	15.11.2018	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds

¶77

OA 341/2023

¶78

¶79

A20	14.10.2020	Extension of EM/Mortgage
A21	12.09.2020	Legal notice
A22	--	Postal receipt
A23	--	Postal acknowledgement
A24	--	Returned postal cover
A25	--	Postal acknowledgement
A26	--	Postal acknowledgement
A27	--	Postal acknowledgement
A28	20.09.2018	Release deed
A29	14.10.2020	Encumbrance certificate from 14.10.2020 to 14.10.2020
A30	20.0.2022	Statement of account pertaining to loan A/c No. 169630100004410
A31	27.08.2021	Statement of account pertaining to loan a/c NO. 16963010007295
A32	25.03.2022	Statement of account pertaining to loan A/c No. 1696163650000001

¶80

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶81

-Nil -

¶82

-Nil -

¶83

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Safewud Industries India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Safewud Industries India Pvt. Ltd.

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

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S Vahe Guru International

Punjab National Bank versus Naman Jain and Ors.

Mohammad Fayyaz S/O Mohammad Ibrahim versus Idbi Bank Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Bhartu Ram Ashish Kumar

Murali Medicals versus Catholic Syrian Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Waseemraj Gafarsab Shilledar