Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Meenakshi Earth Movers

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/2060/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India against five defendants for issuance of a Recovery Certificate, accepting uncontroverted evidence of loan default. The claim for principal and interest was granted with reduced simple interest at 12%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 1,86,43,109.69 with 12% simple interest from filing date, recoverable jointly/severally against defendants and their assets.

Union Bank of India versus Meenakshi Earth Movers — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 30^th Day of January, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2060/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India Head office at: No. 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Branch office at: HSR layout Branch, No. 1674, 27^th main, street-2, HSR layout, Bangalore – 560 102

¶7

Represented by its Senior Manager

¶8

Mr. B Bhanuteja Naik …APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

M/s. Meenakshi Earth Movers No. 2019, 22^nd main, 14^th cross, Sector-1, HSR layout, Bangalore – 560 102 Represented by its partners

¶11

a. Mr. Nagabhushan Reddy L

¶12

b. Mr. Jayaram Reddy L

¶13

Mr. Nagabhushan Reddy L S/o. L Muniswamy Reddy Aged about 53 years no. 1383, 25^th main, sector -2, HSR layout, Bangalore – 560 102

¶14

Mr. Jayaram Reddy S/o. L Krishna Reddy Aged about 39 years

¶15

2 OA-2060/2024

¶16

No. 3, Mariswamy Building, Behind Govt. School, Sarjapura Road, Agara, Bangalore – 560 102

¶17

Mrs. N Susheela W/o. L Nagabhushan Reddy Aged about 50 years No. no. 1383, 25^th main, sector -2, HSR layout, Bangalore – 560 102

¶18

Miss. L Meenakshi Reddy D/o. L Nagabhushan Reddy Aged about 21 years no. 1383, 25^th main, sector -2, HSR layout, Bangalore – 560 102 ...DEFENDANTS

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶20

Applicant : Shivashankara A Defendants : Ex parte

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

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. 1,86,43,109.69/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Six Lakhs Forty Three Thousand One Hundred and Nine and Paisa Sixty Nine Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶23

3 OA-2060/2024

¶24

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed an secured over draft of Rs. 1,80,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Lakhs Thousand Only) for the purpose of working capital requirement.

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with deposit of title deeds.

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 13.08.2025.

¶29

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-12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

4 OA-2060/2024

¶32

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶33

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶34

claim as against the defendants?

¶35

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶36

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶37

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. 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 facility as stated in the OA,

¶38

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶39

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are

¶44

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view

¶45

that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶46

5 OA-2060/2024

¶47

In the result, OA.No.2060/2024 stands allowed,

¶48

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

¶49

Rs. 1,86,43,109.69/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Six Lakhs Forty Three Thousand One Hundred and Nine and Paisa Sixty Nine Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA

¶50

till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally 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 proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶54

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.

¶55

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

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

¶57

terms of this final order.

¶58

6 OA-2060/2024

¶59

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶60

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

¶61

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶63

the Open Court, this the 30^th

Sd/-

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶68

AW-1: Mr. S K Vasantha Kumar, S/o. S Kuruppaiah, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶69

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶70

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Sanction letter dated 03.02.2017 issued by applicant/plaintiff bank
A2	Sanction letter dated 14.05.2019 issued by applicant/plaintiff bank
A3	Demand promissory note dated 27.08.2019 executed by first defendant
A4	Composite agreement dated 27.08.2019 executed by the first defendant

¶71

7 OA-2060/2024

¶72

A5	Gift deed dated 26.10.2010 submitted by fourth defendant
A6	Sale deed dated 12.02.2004 submitted by fourth and fifth defendant
A7	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 12.05.2020 executed by fourth and fifth defendants
A8	General form of guarantee dated 27.08.2019 executed by the second, third and fourth defendants
A9	General form of guarantee dated 19.05.2020 executed by the fourth and fifth defendants
A10	Composite agreement dated 12.07.2021 executed by the second defendant
A11	Demand notice U/s. 13(2) of SARFAESI act, 2002 issued by applicant/plaintiff bank
A12	Certified copy of statement of account extract bearing no. 114031100000292

¶73

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

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Meenakshi Earth Movers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Meenakshi Earth Movers

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

S Rajeswari versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Kishan Mitrapal Chawla Dairy

Bank of India versus Ms Narmada Pipes

Ms Khajuria Constructions and Another versus State Bank of India

Raj Kumar Baniya versus State Bank of India

Smt Firoja Begum versus Indian Bank