Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Rajkumar Poultry

DRT9 Dec 2025OA/45/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DT-I, Hyderabad allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs.1,53,23,309.84 plus future interest against multiple defendants, including directors, guarantors, and legal heirs, declaring them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.1,53,23,309.84 plus future interest and costs. Joint and several liability on defendants. Recovery certificate issued.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER OA.No.4S of 2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

Union Bank of India, Geesukonda branch, Warangal district, Telangana State. Represented by its Manager And Principal Officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. Rajkumar Poultry Prop: Veeragoni Rajkumar S/o Sri V. Rangaswamy, Aged major, occ: business, R/o H. No.2-8l2, Geesukonda, Warangal, TS - 506 330.

¶9

Mr. Veeragoni Rajkumar,

¶10

s/o V. Rangaswamy, aged major, occ: business, R/o H.No.2-8l2, Geesukonda, Warangal,^{TS -506 330.}

¶11

Mr, Chittareddy Prabhakar Reddy^(died) S/o Ch. Mallareddy, aged major, Occ: business, #H.No.7-51,^Konaimakula, Geesugonda mandal, Warangal District - 506 330.

¶12

Mr. Gone Mallaiah,

¶13

S/o G. Rosaiah, aged major, Occ: business, R/o H.No.1-18,. . Gangadevipally, Geesukonda, ..,' Warangal - 506 330.

¶14

Mr. B. Prakash, S/o Mallaiah, aged major,

¶15

''' I S

¶16

Occ: business, R/o H.No.2-92, ,

¶17

(OA.No.45/2022)

¶18

Machapur, Geesukonda, Warangal Rural - 506 33OO

¶19

Mrs. Chittireddy Anasurya, Wo^{Late Chittireddy PrabhakarReddy,} H.No.7-51, Konaimakula, Geesugonda mandal, Warangal district -506 330.

¶20

Chittireddy Jithender reddy, s/o Late Chittireddy Prabhakar reddy, #H.No.7-51, Konaimakula, Geesugonda mandal, Warangal District - 506 330.

¶21

Mr. Chittireddy Jeevan Reddy, s/o Late Chittireddy Prabhakar Reddy, #H.No.7-51, Konaimakula, Geesugonda mandal, Warangal District - 506 330.

¶22

Mr. Chittireddy Jay Kumar, s/o Late Chittireddy Prabhakar Reddy, #H,No.7-51, Konaimakula, Geesugonda mandal, Warangal District - 506 330.

¶23

(Defendants 6 to 9 are legal heirs Of deceased defendant no.3)

¶24

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant For the Defendants Defendant no.3 Reserved on

¶25

Pronounced on

¶26

Uploaded in website on

¶27

Sri P. Balaji Exparte

Abated

05.t2.2025

09.L2.2025

09.t2.2025

Defendants

0^g OEE ?fi25

(oA.No.asl2022)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,53,23,3o9.84ps (Rupees One

¶37

Crore Fifty Three Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred Nine and paise Eighty four only) with future interest @ 24o/o p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶38

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. Raj Kumar Poultry, represented by its proprietor Mr. Veeragoni Rajkumar/ defendant no.2. Defendants no.3 to 5 stood as guarantors to the loan availed by defendant no.1. The defendants availed term loan of Rs.108.25 lakhs, OCC of Rs.125 lakhs, crop loan of Rs,1,50 lakhs, UGCL of Rs.5,97,450/- and executed composite loan agreement, demand promissory note etc. The defendants created equitable mortgage of schedule properties and deposited the title deeds in respect of schedule properties. subsequently the defendant no.3 died and legal heirs of deceased were impleaded vide orders dated 23.07.2025 in IA.L653/2025. After availing the loan facilities, the defe.ndants failed to^qomFl-y the terms of sanction, hence the aDplicant, bank classified th'e account as NPA on 30.04.2021 and 0gSrC/% i '.',t - 3

¶39

(oA.No.4sl2022)

¶40

demand notice was issued on 9.08.2021. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶41

Defendant No.1,2,4& 5 called absent and set exparte on 08.03.2023 Defendant no.3 expired and the claim against Defendant no.3 is dismissed as abated. Defendants 6 to 9 called absent and set exparte on 05.12,2025.

¶42

Sri V. Vijay, Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.20.

¶43

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶44

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?

¶45

Defendant No.7,2,4,5 to 9 remained exparte. Defendant no,3 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.^'[B view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank

¶46

¶47

(oA.No.45/2022)

¶48

hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim^{madein the} OA with future interest and costs.

¶49

In the result, the^present OA^is allowed^{with costs, as under:} The Defendants No.1,2,4,5 to 9 are^jointly and severally^liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,53,23,3o9.84ps^(Rupees One Crore Fifty Three Lakhs Twenty^{Three ThousandThree} Hundred Nine and^paise Eighty four only)^{with future interest} @ 24o/o p.a from date of application till the date of^realization.

¶50

The Applicant Bank is entitled to^proceed against^{the mortgaged} properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realisation of the debt due.

¶51

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^proceed against^{the personand} properties of defendants No.2,4,5 to 9 and^properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.^{Howeverthe applicant} bank is entitled to^proceed against the^{legal heirs} /^{defendants no. 6} to 9 only to the extent of estate devolved upon^{them from the} deceased defendant no.3.

¶52

The to the costs of the OA.

¶53

t2. o within two weeks from the date

¶54

¶55

(oA.No.asl2022)

¶56

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶57

communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶58

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 9th day of Dec, 2025)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

O g SEC flIM

tr,W

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Rajkumar Poultry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Rajkumar Poultry

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Dappu Yadagiri

Sairam Constructions versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

Mr Palla Kiran Kumar versus Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Canara Bank versus Pokkula Sandhya

Sri Venkata Sai Traders and Another versus Punjab National Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S. Koolsafe Global