Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sri Rama Cotton Ginning Mill

DRT4 May 2026OA/172/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues from five respondent-defendants, who were present ex-parte. The Tribunal held the defendants jointly and severally liable for the claimed loan amounts, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay the claimed loan amounts with future interest and costs; OA secured by mortgaged properties; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Sri Rama Cotton Ginning Mill — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE O4TH DAY OF MAY, 2026 PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR Ko o*.r,o,rlroui.1frofl^{., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.}

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN No: 172 oF 2025

¶3

Union Bank of India., 5eDestian.Roa_d Branch, 9_1_ 199_21g_12 d(-r3, s! Mary s Road, Opp passDort unrce, secunderaoao _ sbooo:l Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶4

.....Appticant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

M/s. SriRama Cotton Ginning Mill., Regd. Office plot No. 227, nlmasguda B N Reddy Nagar, Balapur wandal Ranga Reddy District, Telanga na_5OO 112.

¶7

Also at:2-94 Gu.nduru Village, Kulwakurthy Mandal, Nagarkurnool District Tetangana - 509324.

¶8

Rep by it-s Managing partner, Mr.Vemula S.flntvas Rao, S/o. Vemula Gopal Rao Male, Occ: Business.

¶9

Mr. Vemula Srinivasa Rao S/o.._ I'lr. Vemula Gopal Rao, Aged about 50^years, Male, Occ: Business, R/o.2_g4 Gunduru Village, Kulwakurthy, Mandal Nagarkurnool District, Telangana _ 509324.

¶10

Mrs. Vemula Sunitha, W/o. Mr. Vemula Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 4g years Female, Occ: Business. Wo- 2_94 Gunduru Village. Kulwakurthy, Mandal Nagarkurnool District, Telangana _ 509324.

¶11

Mrs. Aineni Srilatha, W/o. Mr. Aineni Surya Prakash Rao, Aged about 36 years Ava,:

(-/ os

oA.NO.172l2025

Female,^{Occ: Business'R/o'H'No'12-20/24} ii;ti i'ils*;^{K3lYT3taurthvMa ndal} N;4fiil;"i^{Di'ttitt,relansana- 509324'}

¶16

1. Mr.^{Aineni ShYamSunderRao} ' Sto.^{Aineni Bhagavanth Rao} it"i inout^{52 iears'Male' occ:Business} ii"-. n"."r.r".i-105,^{RT' colonv' Medchal..^-} Iti il';;^{; ;;o o v- 6 i't'i tt' reI a n e a n a - 5 01 4 0 1'}

¶17

Mrs.^{PasulaPadma'W/o'Mr'Pasula} " i"inloov, Rgeo aoout Maior'^Female il;''il;i;"t"t,^{n/o' H'No'12-1e2lts} ' ' Viorunisu.^colony, -^{Kalwakurthy[11{1.} o i ti'i tt,^{reI a n s a n a - 5 0 e 3 2 4'}

¶18

i,;d ;; n"r';; ...Defendants ",

¶19

: Mr.^DeePesh Qahadur

¶20

Counsel^{for the APPlicant} : Ex-Parte

¶21

Defendants

¶22

:: ORDER^::

¶23

OA for^{the recoverY a total}

¶24

1. The Applicant^{Bank filed the present} i.€., a^sumof

¶25

sum of Rs'10,21,48'781'08Ps Loan^(Plant)

¶26

Rs.5,82,92,506.52Ps^{towards Term} A/c.No.052916390000001^{with future interest@13'80o/o p'a''a} sum of^{Rs.3,20,16,523'56pstowards Cash Credit and Adhoc} Facility Loan^{A/c.No'052915010000001with future interest} @13.30o/o^{p.a. and a sum of Rs'1,18'39'751/-towardsTerm} Loan^{(Solar) A/c.No.052916450000001with future interest} @13.80%^{p.a. from the defendantsjointly and severallywith} monthly^{rests from 06'02'2025 till the date of realizationalong} with costs^{and in defaultfor sale of OA scheduleproperties'}

¶27

Summons^{servedon D5} through^{paper publication and was set} as called absent^{and no representation'}

¶28

ex-pafte on^23.07.2025

¶29

ffi,o'*

¶30

oA.No,t7zl2o2s

¶31

WS not filed by D1 to 4 and 6 hence, their right was forfeited on 28.08.2025 as called absent and no representation. DE not filed by D1 to 4 and 6 hence, their right was forfeited and set ex-parte on 24.04.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶32

The Appticant Bank examined Naga Madhuri M, Chief Manager, as AW-l and marked 63 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.63.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the material placed on record.

¶34

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶35

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA sciedule properties?

¶36

¶37

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to 4.63 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim oF the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Appltcant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶38

In the result, the present Origlnal Application No.l72/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶39

i) The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.10,21,48,781.09ps i.e., a sum.pf ']...'-n "

¶40

oA.NO.172l2025

¶41

¶42

Rs.5,82,92,506.52ps^{towards Term Loan} (Plant) A/c.No.o5291639000000^{1' a sum of} Rs.3,20,16,523.56ps^{towards cash credit} and Adhoc^{Facility Loan Alc'No'} O52915O1O0OOOO1^{and a sumof} Rs.1,18,39,751l-^{towardsTerm Loan (Solar)} A/c.No.O5291645OOOOOO1;^wlthfuture interest @7.40olo P.a^{simplefrom the date of} application^{till the date of reallzation;}

¶43

¶44

the OA^{claim is secured by way of mortgage} of^{properties described in the schedule} annexed^{to theOA and the applicant bankis} entitled to^{proceedagainstthe same to} realise^{its debt;}

¶45

iii) the applicant^{bank is also entitled to proceed} against^{the person and propertiesof} defendants^{for realization of its dues;}

¶46

iv) the^{applicantbankis entitledfor the costs'}

¶47

The Applicant^{Bankis directed to flle Cost Memo within 2 weeks} from the^{date of receipt of thls Order'}

¶48

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly'}

¶49

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the partiesconcerned'} 1-oictateo^{to ttre steno, coriected,signedand pronouncedbY mein,the open courton} this the^{04rh Day of Mai,2025).}

¶50

PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sri Rama Cotton Ginning Mill

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Sri Rama Cotton Ginning Mill

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sri Siva Sai Jyothi Bharath Gas Gramin Vitrak

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Suneetha Jidagam

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Pratyusha Mohanram

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. Sri Valli Silks.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Vk Warehousing Enterprises

Idfc First Bank Ltd. Now versus Bsa Gold and Diamonds Private Limited