Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Prashanth Kumar M

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/1573/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against defendants who failed to appear. The court reduced the interest rate to 8% p.a. (simple) considering the housing purpose of the loan and approved recovery against schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Issued Recovery Certificate for Rs. 33.36 Lakhs with 8% p.a. simple interest from the date of filing, enforceable against defendants and schedule properties.

Union Bank of India versus Prashanth Kumar M — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1573/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Union Bank of India Head office at: No.239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Pint, Mumbai – 400 021 Branch office at: No. 929/A, Near IOC Petrol Bunk, Devarachikkanahalli Road, BTM 4^th Stage, Bangalore – 560 076

¶6

Represented by its Senior Manager

¶7

Mr. Janakiram Naik Angot …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Prashanth Kumar M S/o. Shankar Shetty Aged about 42 years No. 09, 2^nd floor, Nanjundeshwara Nilaya, Shivanna Layout, Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bangalore – 560 098

¶10

Mrs. Asha Rani S W/o. Prashanth Kumar M Aged about 40 years No. 09, 2^nd floor, Nanjundeshwara Nilaya, Shivanna Layout, Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bangalore – 560 098 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

OA-1573/2022

¶12

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Mr. Shivashankar A Defendants : Ex parte

¶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 for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 33,36,129.06/- (Rupees Thirty-Three Lakhs Thirty-Six Thousand One Hundred and Twenty-Nine and Paisa Six 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 are availed a Housing loan of Rs. 31,50,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for purchase of flat.

¶18

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 deposit of title deeds.

¶19

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

¶20

OA-1573/2022

¶21

¶22

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.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 17.03.2026.

¶24

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-7 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶28

claim as against the defendants?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. The evidence tendered

¶32

by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed.

¶33

The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible

¶34

and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the

¶35

OA-1573/2022

¶36

¶37

OA, and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

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

¶39

finds that both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are availed for Housing purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is of the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.1573/2022, stands allowed,

¶42

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

¶43

Rs. 33,36,129.06/- (Rupees Thirty-Three Lakhs Thirty-Six Thousand One Hundred and Twenty-Nine and Paisa Six Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date 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 recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶44

OA-1573/2022

¶45

¶46

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient the

¶47

defendants are jointly, severally and personally & their other assets

¶48

are liable to be proceeded against for realization of respective dues.

¶49

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶50

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

¶51

receipt of the order.

¶52

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

¶53

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶54

v) Interim application pending, if any, are disposed of with this Final Order.

¶55

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶56

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

¶57

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶58

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of March, 2026].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-1573/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Karthik S, S/o. Sampangi Ramaiah, Assit. Manager, of

¶66

Applicant Bank.

¶67

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶68

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1 & A2	Loan application dated 17.04.2018 submitted by defendants and sanction letter dated 27.04.2018
A3	Composite agreement dated 03.05.2018 executed by defendants
A4	Sale deed dated 03.05.2018 submitted by first defendant
A5	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 03.05.2018
A6	Demand notice u/s. 13(a) SARFAESI dt. 08.04.2021
A7	Statement of account

¶69

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Prashanth Kumar M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Prashanth Kumar M

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

State Bank of India versus Rajendrakumar Jain

Inno Infra Pvt. Ltd. and 9 Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajdeepsinh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Jaswinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Bandhav Filling Centre