Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Badri Industries

DRT25 Mar 2025OA/380/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues under the Recovery of Debts Act. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable for the principal, future interest, and costs, based on unchallenged loan documents.

What did the court decide?

Defendants 1 to 4 directed to pay total sum of Rs.7,43,12,327.97 with future interest at 9.70% p.a. simple from date of application. Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Badri Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH,²⁰²⁵

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAIVIESHWAR KOTHE, B.COM, L.LB.^(HONS.),M.A' PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^NO: 3BO^{OF 2024}

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India., Srinivasam Complex Branch, Tirumala Bypass Road, Behind TMR Kalyana Mandapam, Korlagunta, Tirupathi - 517501. Rep. by its Principal Officer and Manager.

¶6

....Applicant.

¶7

And

¶8

M/s. Badri Ind ustries., Rep by its Proprietor Mrs.T. Reddemma, S. No.5 58/3, Plot No.295, Vaikuntapuri Layout, Yerra ma reddypalem, Th ukiva kam, Ren ig u nta, Tirupathi - 517506.

¶9

lvlrs.T. Reddemma, S/o. Suri, Aged about 27 Yeats, Occ: Business, S.No.558/3, Plot No.295, Vaikuntapuri Layout, Yerrama reddypa lem, Thu kivaka m, Ren igunta, Tirupathi - 517506.

¶10

Mr.T.Suri Babu, S/o.T. ka la ppa, Aged 33 Years, Occ: Business, D.No.17-6-400, Poolathota Veedhi, Tirupathi - 517501.

¶11

14 rs. E. Ka ma la mma, W/o. E.Su bba ia h, Aged 48 Years, Occ: Business, D.No. 17-6-400, Poolathota Veedhi, Tirupathi - 517501.

).;

.... Defendants

oa3aol2024

Counsel for the Applicant Counsel for D- 1 & 2 Defendants 3 and 4

¶16

Mr.N.V.Subba Raju No representation Ex-parte

¶17

:: ORDER ::

¶18

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA u/s 19 of The Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,43,12,327.97ps i.e., a sum of Rs.70,80,396.05ps under A/c. No.538606180000004 and a sum of Rs.72,31,931.92ps under A/c. No.538605090000004 from the defendants jointly and severally together with future interest @ 72.20o/o p.a. at monthly rests from 72.07.2024 till the date of realisation along with costs and sale OA schedule^properties.

¶19

The averments of applicant bank as per the OA, briefly, are that 1't defendant proprietary firm represented by its^{proprietor2nd} defendant, availed Term Loan under Naari Shakthi Scheme from the applicant bank vide sanction letter dated 08.08.2022. Defendant No.3 is the guarantor to the loan and 3rd defendant created mortgage by deposit of original title deed ln respect of OA schedule^properties as security to the loan. Defendants executed necessary loan documents. Defendant No.1 availed Cash Credit Loan under Naari Shakthi Scheme from the applicant bank vide sanction letter dated 08.03.2023. Defendants 3 & 4 are the^guarantors and mortgagors to the Cash Credit Loan. Due to default and neglect in repayment, the loan account was declared as NPA as per the^guidelines issued by the RBI. Despite several demands and in spite of Loan Recall notice dated 15.07.2024, the defendants falled to clear the outstanding dues. Hence the^present OA is filed. ffio*

¶20

oA.380/2024

¶21

The Defendants 3 & 4 was set ex-parte on 06.03.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶22

Though the Defendants 1 & 2 entered appearance through their counsel 14r. Tarak Abhilash, they did not choose to file written statement. Accordingly, defendants' right of filinq written statement was forfeited vide docket order dated O2.O1-.2025.

¶23

The Appllcant Bank examined K.Gopinath, Asst. Manager as AW-1 and marked 25 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.25. 6. The Defendants 1 & 2 right of adducing evidence was forfeited for non-representation vide docket order dated 06.03.2025.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant bank, whereas Defendants 1 & 2 right of advancing arguments was forfeited on 20.03.2025. Perused the material placed on record.

¶25

The polnt that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants and OA schedule properties?

¶27

According to the applicant bank, after availing loan facilities the defendants committed default in repayment despite several requests and legal notice. The defendants did not choose to contest the case and the claim of the applicant bank is amply^proved vlde Exs.A.1 to A.25 marked through AW.l and the recitals therein.

¶28

As stated supra, defendants 3 and 4 remained ex^parte and the defendants 1& 2 did not choose to file written statement, adduce evidence or advance arguments. Under such circumstances, the Evidence Affidavit of AW.1 coupled with the recitals in Exs. A.1^to ,ffit".ntto / ,./'/

¶29

oa3aol2024

¶30

A.25 marked on behalf of the applicant bank remains unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, I hold that the defendants 1 to 4 are liabte to pay the OA claim to the applicant bank with future interest and costs.

¶31

In the result, the present Original Apptication No.380/2024 is allowed as under: -

¶32

Defendants1to4	arejoint	lyandseverally
liableto pay	a t	otal sumof
Rs.7,43,12,327.97	psi.e.	, a sumof
Rs.70,80,396.05	psund	er A/c, No.
53860618000000	4and	a sumof
Rs.72,37,937.92	psund	er A/c. No.
538605090000004	tothe	appticantbank
alongwithfutur	einteres	[email protected].
simplefrom thed	ateofap	plicationtillthe
dateofrealization;

¶33

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation/mortgage of properties described in the Schedules annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the same for realisation of its debt;

¶34

iii) the applicant bank is entiued to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶35

iv) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs. N**

¶36

oA.38012024

¶37

The Applicant Bank is directed to fire cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload in Web Portal.

¶40

(Dictated to the steno, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 25th day of March, 2025. )

¶41

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Badri Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Badri Industries

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

Axis Bank Ltd., versus Sri Sai Foundry

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Andela Textiles Private Limited

Union Bank of India versus M/S De Generic Bio Tech Private Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs.Asma Begum

Union Bank of India versus Tammisetti Subbarao Civil Contractor

Sri Mohan Babu Vuppu versus Union Bank of India