Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Aravind Infracon India Pvt; Ltd. and others

DRT19 Jun 2026OA/1060/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by City Union Bank seeking a Recovery Certificate against defendants for loan defaults. Being exparte, the unrebutted evidence established liability. The debt was reduced to 8% simple interest and a Recovery Certificate was ordered.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 2,59,85,644/- with 8% simple interest to be recovered from defendants jointly, severally, and personally against scheduled properties.

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Aravind… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1060/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

City Union Bank Branch Office at: J.P Nagar, D. No. 253, 24^th Main, 16^th Cross, 5^th Phase, J.P. Nagar, Bangalore-560078. Represented by its Branch Manager, Mr. RengaPrasath R.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/S Arvind Infracon India Pvt. Ltd., A registered Company under the Companies Act 1956 Being represented by its Directors Office at: No. 1208, 2^nd Floor, 41^st Cross, 26^th Main, Jayanagar 9^th Block, Bangalore-560069.

¶10

Mr. J.V. Krishna Reddy S/o Lakshmi Reddy Janke,

¶11

Ms. J. Padma Reddy W/o Mr. J.V. Krishna Reddy

¶12

Both of them are residing at Flat No. 502, “SarvajitHeights Apartment”, Gottigere, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore-560083. ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : H. R. Sunil Kumar Defendants : Exparte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 2,59,85,644/(Rupees Two Crore Fifty Nine Lakh Eighty Five Thousand Six Hundred Forty Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶18

I. Swayamgriha other housing Loan of a sum of Rs. 35,50,000/- on 29.10.2015.

¶19

II. Secured OD without DP Loan of sum of Rs. 1,75,00,000/- on 17.09.2016.

¶20

III. FITL- ADHOC Loan of sum of Rs. 11,64,000/- on 02.09.2020.

¶21

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 Guarantee Agreement, Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds.

¶22

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.

¶23

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal

¶24

by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶25

Despite, summons the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 13.08.2025.

¶26

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-13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

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

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

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

¶33

interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the

¶34

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.

¶35

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Housing 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 8.00% (simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.1060/2022, stands allowed,

¶38

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

¶39

Rs.2,59,85,644/- (Rupees Two Crore Fifty Nine lakh Eighty Five Thousand Six Hundred Forty Four only) consisting of:

¶40

a. Rs.37,41,540 /- with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants;

¶41

b. Rs.2,08,55,849/- with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants;

¶42

c. Rs.13,88,255/- with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants jointly, severally

¶43

and 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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶44

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants Jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

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.

¶46

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

¶47

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

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

¶49

of this final order.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

Rules, 1993.

¶53

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 19^th Day of June, 2026].

¶54

(T. RAJESH)

¶55

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Mr. Murali Kumar. C, Branch Development Officer of the applicant

¶59

Bank

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	28.10.2015	Sanction Letter for Advances
A2	29.10.2015	Application Cum Undertaking for loan
A3	29.10.2015	On Demand promissory Note
A4	19.04.2018	Letter of revival -Secured Advances
A5	17.04.2021	Letter of revival -Secured Advances
A6	17.09.2016	Sanction Letter
A7	22.09.2016	On demand Promissory Note along with Latter of Continuity
A8	20.03.2019	Letter of revival -Secured Advances
A9	22.09.2016	Guarantee Agreement
A10	21.09.2016	Letter of Confirmation for Extension of Mortgage by Deposit of Title Deeds Covering Addl. Credit Facilities
A11	29.10.2015	Registered Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds
A12	28.09.2021	Possession Notice under Section 13(4)
A13	--	Certified Copy of Statement of Accounts

¶62

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

-Nil -

-Nil –

(T. RAJESH)

PRESIDING OFFICER

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Aravind Infracon India Pvt; Ltd. and others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. M/S Aravind Infracon India Pvt; Ltd. and others

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

Ms D S Enterprise And Anr. versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus Sri Amal Roy And Anr.

Ved Parkash versus Cholamandalam investment and finance company limited

Indian Bank versus M/S Sai Automobiles

Bank of India versus M/s Vishnu Priya Enterprises

Badal Das and Anr. versus Aditya Birla Finance Limited and Anr.