Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Deity Aroma

DRT25 Nov 2025OA/370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the OA filed by Union Bank of India against the legal heirs of the deceased proprietor of M/s. Deity Aroma. The court held the applicants entitled to recover the outstanding sum of Rs. 29,99,985 with future interest and to proceed against hypothecated and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

The present OA is allowed; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 29,99,985 with future interest; issue recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Deity Aroma — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE 25rH DAy OF NOVEMBE& 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.37O of 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India, (E- Andhra Bank), Isnapur branch, Isnapur X roads, Patancheru mandal, Medak district, TS - 502 307. Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Deity Aroma,

¶10

Prop: Sudharshanam Shashidhar, (died) s/o Satyanarayana, aged 44 years, #2-3-703/L to 3, B-blcok, 205 venkatadri towers, Tirumala nagar, Am berpet, Hyderabad - 500 013. TS.

¶11

Also at

¶12

#24 & 25/ SDF, block-Z/GF 4 EPIP Pashyamylaram village, Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy District - 502 307. TS.

¶13

Plot no.16, Sai vilas # 5-125/L6, Near fusion International school, Ameenpur, Sangareddy dist - 502 032.

¶14

rayana,

¶15

&p^LbYEFt Shashidhar, ffior,^pi6i 16, Sai vilas # 5-L25/L6, ft€ar fusioi International^school, SbpOareddy dist - 502 032. ffieo0pur,

¶16

Thirunagari, Shashidhar,

¶17

k6€rY.":;g?'

¶18

(oA.No.370/2024)

¶19

aged 39 years, Plot no.16, Sai vilas # 5-125116, Near fusion International school, Ameenpur, Sangareddy dist - 502 032.

¶20

Ms. Manyasree,

¶21

D/o Late Sudharshanam Shashidhar,

¶22

Minor, aged 4 years, plot no.16, Sai vilas # 5-L25/L6,

¶23

Near fusion International school,

¶24

Ameenpur, Sangareddy dist - 502 032.

¶25

Mr. Hayagreeva Sudharshanam,

¶26

s/o Late Sudharshanam Shashidar,

¶27

minor, aged 2 years, plot no.16,

¶28

Sai vilas # 5-L25/t6,

¶29

Near fusion International school,

¶30

Ameenpur, Sangareddy dist - 502 032.

¶31

Defendants 2 to 5 are legal heirs of defendant no.1

¶32

Defendants

¶33

Counsel for the Parties:

¶34

For the Applicant Sri Srinivas Rao Chakrala For the Defendant No. 3 to 5the Defendant No. 3 to 5Defendant No. 3 to 5No. 3 to 5to 55 Exparte Defendant no.1 Abated

¶35

For the Defendant No. 3 to 5the Defendant No. 3 to 5Defendant No. 3 to 5No. 3 to 5to 55

Defendant no.1

Defendant no.2

Reserved on

Sri J. Bhanu Prasad

L9.lL.2025

Pronounced on 25.tl.2025

¶42

Uploaded in website on

¶43

2s.lt.2025

¶44

ORDER

¶45

led the present OA against Defendants No. 2 to 5 flr5reitijVdP$ of q, totat sum of Rs.29,99,985/- (Rupees Twenty

¶46

Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty five

¶47

(oA.No.370/2024)

¶48

only) with future interest @ 9.55o/o p.a from 2L.O7.2024 till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶49

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 is a^proprietary concern in the name and style as M/s. Deity Aroma, represented by its proprietor Mr. Sudharshanam Shashidhar availed loan facility of Rs.30.00 lakhs and cash credit of Rs.10.00 lakhs. The defendant executed term loan agreement, demand promissory note, interest agreement, letter of continuity, letter of undertaking of hypothecation of^goods etc. subsequently the defendant no.1 proprietor died and legal heirs of deceased were impleaded vide orders dated 31.07.2025 in lA.4L8/2025. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA and SARFAESI^proceedings initiated. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶50

called absent 30.10.2025. no.2 filed file written aga inst

¶51

(oA. No.370/2024)

¶52

Sri Sukhpal Singh Tomer, Officer of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.20.

¶53

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶54

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?

¶55

Defendant No.3 to 5 remained exparte, Defendant no.2 filed vakalath but failed to file WS. Defendant no.1 expired and the claim against Defendant no.1 is dismissed as abated. 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.20. 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.

¶56

B, In the result, the^present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶57

nts No.2 to 5 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the a total sum of Rs.29,99,985/-^(Rupees Twenty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty five

¶58

¶59

(oA.No.370/2024)

¶60

only) with future interest @ 9.55o/o p.a from 2L.07.2024 till the date of realization.

¶61

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated propefty as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards ealization of the debt due.

¶62

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 5 towards realization of the debt due. However the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against only to the extent of estate devolved upon them from the deceased defendant no. 1.

¶63

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

¶64

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

¶65

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶66

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Deity Aroma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Deity Aroma

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

Kamma Upender versus State Bank of India

Alakuntla Yellaiah versus Smfg India Home Finance Company Limited

G Sreedharan versus Bank of Baroda

Central Bank of India versus Sri. Mohd. Khaleel

Canara Bank versus Sri. Sura Sree Harsha

State Bank of India versus Smt. Jonnada Sravani