Allowed

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. Malathi

DRT18 Dec 2025OA/644/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for issuance of a recovery certificate. After hearing the applicant and respondents appearing ex parte, the court reduced the interest rate on the outstanding loan amount to 6% per annum and ordered recovery jointly and severally from the defendants.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of recovery certificate for the outstanding sum worth Rs. 3,23,88,249.41 with reduced interest of 6% p.a. simple.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 18^th Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.644/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Union Bank of India Head office at: Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021

¶6

Branch office at: Near Jain Temple, BB Road, Devanahalli, Bangalore Rural, Karnataka – 562 110

¶7

Represented by its Branch Manager

¶8

Surendar …APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Smt. V Malathi W/o. V N Raju Aged 40 years No.17B, Yalluvahalli, Mulabagal, Kolar – 563 131

¶11

Sri. V N Raju Aged major S/o. Venkatarame Gowda No.17B, Yalluvahalli, Mulabagal, Kolar – 563 131

¶12

Smt. B K Padmavathamma W/o. Ashok Kumar Aged major No.17B, Yalluvahalli, Mulabagal, Kolar – 563 131

¶13

OA-644/2023

¶14

¶15

Smt. Majulammma W/o. S Venugopala Reddi Aged major No.17B, Yalluvahalli, Mulabagal, Kolar – 563 131 DEFENDANTS

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : Divya Purandar Defendants : Ex parte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 3,23,88,249.41/- (Rupees Three Crore Twenty Three Thousand Eighty Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Forty Nine and Paisa Forty One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed an term loan of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Only) to establish a poultry breeding farm with 30000 layer capacity for hatching eggs production.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents along with simple mortgage deed and deed of hypothecation.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility,

¶23

OA-644/2023

¶24

¶25

agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶26

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.

¶27

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 12.03.2025.

¶28

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-19 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

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

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶35

unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. The evidence tendered

¶36

by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The

¶37

OA-644/2023

¶38

¶39

evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the OA,

¶40

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 document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶44

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view

¶45

that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶46

In the result, OA.No.644/2023 stands allowed,

¶47

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶48

Rs 3,23,88,249.41/- (Rupees Three Crore Twenty Three Thousand

¶49

Eighty Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Forty Nine and Paisa Forty

¶50

One Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date

¶51

of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be

¶52

OA-644/2023

¶53

¶54

recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties

¶55

schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶56

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the

¶57

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶58

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such

¶59

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶60

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶61

which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of

¶62

receipt of the order.

¶63

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order

¶64

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶65

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in

¶66

terms of this final order.

¶67

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶68

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

¶69

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶70

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 18^th Day of December, 2025].

¶71

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/-

OA-644/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶77

AW-1: Cyril Monterio, S/o. Francis Monterio, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶78

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶79

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1 & A2	Original loan application and sanction communication
A3	Original term loan agreement dated 03.04.2013
A4	Original hypothecation deed dated 03.04.2013
A5 & A6	Common deed of hypothecation dated 03.04.2013 and also hypothecation of gober gas dated 03.04.2013
A7	Original letter of undertaking and a declaration dated 03.04.2013
A8 & A9	Original demand promissory note dated 03.04.2013 and take delivery note dated 03.04.2013
A10	Original mortgage deed dated 25.03.2013
A11	Original guarantee agreement dated 03.04.2013
A12 & A13	Original acknowledgement of debt dated 25.03.2016 and subsequent acknowledgement dated 09.01.2019
A14 & A15	Original composite debit balance confirmation dated 10.08.2021 and acknowledgement of debt dated 16.05.2022
A16	Original overdue notice dated 26.03.2021
A17	Original demand notice / SARFAESI notice dated 13.05.2022
A18	Original legal notice for dated 26.11.2022
A19	Copy of certified extract of statement of accounts bearing no. 560931000250544
Witness E	xamined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶80

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶81

-Nil -

¶82

Sd/-

¶83

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶84

7 OA-644/2023

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. Malathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. Malathi

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

Paramjeet Singh versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Md Anwar Hussain And Ors. Propietor of Ms Madina Cloth Store versus West Bengal Gramin Bank

Suresh Kumar versus Canara Bank

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Deepak Kumar

Jarina Bibi And Ors. Pro of Ms Bhangari Shop versus Indian Bank

Federal Bank versus M/s Ave Maria Industries