Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mullaguri Rammohan

DRT10 Apr 2026OA/327/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of dues, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and costs, and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing Defendants to pay Rs.23,71,806.81 plus interest at 11.9%simple, securing it by mortgage, and issuing a Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Mullaguri Rammohan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE loth DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

Original Application No: 327 OF 2OZs

¶4

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA Bathalapalli (Mandal)(Village), Ananthapur Dist Rep by its Sr. Manager and Principal Officer

¶5

.....Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mullaguri Rammohan S/o. M Ramappa, Aged: 59 Years (Male), Occ: Agriculture,

¶8

R/ o. 5-24, Sanjeevapuram(V) Bathalapalli(M), Ananthapuram (Dist) A.P. -s15661

¶9

Ch. Usha Rani

¶10

Wo. Ch Chalapati Aged: Major (Female), Occ; Housewife R/ o. 5-24, Sanjeevapuram(V) Bathalapalli(M), Ananthapuram (Dist) A.P. -515661

¶11

...Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. P. Balaji Counsel for Defendant No.1: Ms. S. Anuradha Defendant No.2: Ex-parte

¶13

:: ORDER::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.23,71,806.81 ps with future interest @ 18% p.a. from the defendants 1 & 2^jointly and severally with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realisation along with costs, and in defa^glt, sale. of O.A, mortgaged property. ffiOrt'

¶15

OA. No.^32712025

¶16

The averments^{of the applicant bank, as stated in the OA' in brief'} are that^{Defendants availedan Agri Term Loanof Rs'10 lakhs'secured by} creation of a^{mortgage over agricultural land admeasuring 4'90acres'} situated at^{Mushtooru (V), by way of a registered deed of simplemortgage} executedon3o'03'20l6,andfurthersecuredbyhypothecationofcrops andreceiVables.Defendantsexecutedloanandguaranteedocuments. Subsequently,^{the ApplicantBankapproved and sanctlonedan additional} CC & CK^{(Cash Credit} /^{Crop/Kharif) facility of Rs'1'00'000/-on} 27.07.2022. The^{Applicant avers that the Defendant was regularin} repayment initially,^{but later becameirregular,on account of whichthe} account^{was classified as an NPA, and the Applicant Bank was constrained} to approach^{this Tribunalfor recovery of the outstandingdues'}

¶17

The written^{statement filed by the 1st defendantThe averments'} thereof briefly,^{are that they fully utilized the loan amountfor developing a} sweet oranqe^{(cheeni) garden. They state that the crop failed due to a} fungal infection^{causingbranchesto secrete a gum like substance'leading} to drying and death^{of the entire plantation, despite repeatedpesticide} applications.^{They further plead that recurringtosses were aggravatedby} severe drought and^{heavy rains in drought ProneAnanthapur district'} resultinq in total^{loss of capltal and labour with no yieldor incomeDenying} any intention^{to evade the loan, they assert that they are law-abidingsmall} farmers willing to^{repay,and request liberal relief, including waiverof} interest, reduction of^{principal,and reschedulinginto yearly instalments} over 5-6^{years. They also rely on the Supreme Court's observationsabout} banks showing^{liberaltreatment to industriallsts whiletakingharshsteps} against farmers,^{and pray for personalverification of their financialposition} and losses by the authorities.

¶18

In order to^prove its^{case,Applicant Bankexamined by Mr. Y. Hari} Krishna, Senior Manager, as^{AW-1 and marked20 documents thPugh hiF} as Exhibits A-1 to A-20. [.it'"''

¶19

OA. No.32712025

¶20

In order to substantiate his defence, the 1't defendant Mr. Mullaguri Rammohan examined himself as DW-1 and marked no documents.

¶21

Though the 2nd defendant entered appearance through a counsel; she failed to file written statement and adduce evidence. As such after affording ample of opportunities, the 2nd defendant was set ex-parte vide docket order dated 30.03.2026.

¶22

7, Heard the Learned counsel for the applicant bank whereas the^right of D1 advancing arguments was forfeited on 15.12.2025 after affording ample opportunity. Perused the material^placed on record.

¶23

B. The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the OA claim against the Defendants and O.A. mortgaged^property?

¶25

1't Defendant is not disputing availment of loan, creation of^mortgage and default in repayment. What he denies is willful default stating^that failure to repay the loan was due to losses in cultivation activity on account of fungal infections to the orange trees, and severe climatic conditions.^The applicant^produced 20 documents and marked them through^{AW-1 as proof} of its claim. The evidence affidavit of AW-1 coupled with^recitals in^Exhibits A-1 to A-20 remains unchallenged and un-rebutted. Hence, I hold that the defendants 1 & 2 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the^applicant bank the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶26

Though the defendant requests time to repay the loan, it is within the discretion of the applicant bank to^grant time for NPA accounts. Apparently the defendants are farmers/cultivators and therefore the applicant bank may consider if such request is^placed by the

¶27

oA. No. 327l2025

¶28

In the result, the^{present Original ApplicationNo.32712025 is allowed} as under:^-

¶29

i) The Defendants 1 & 2 are^jointly and^severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a^{sum of} Rs.23,71,806.81^ps with future interest @11.90olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of^mortgageof property as described in the schedules annexed to the OA and applicant bank is entitled^{to proceed} against the same for realization of^dues;

¶31

iii) the applicant is also entitled to^{proceed against the} person and properties of the defendants 1 & 2 for realization of dues; and

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for^{the costs.}

¶33

The Applicant Bank is directed to^file Cost^{Memo within 2 weeks from} the date of receipt of this Order.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

L4. Communicate a copy of this order to the^{partiesconcernedand} upload in the official website.

¶36

(Typed to my dictation by the P5, corrected, signed and^pronounced by^{me in the open court} on this the 10th day of April, 2025)^.

¶37

sutot\ ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Mullaguri Rammohan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mullaguri Rammohan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/s. S N Agro Trading.

Ms Ramsethu Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank

K Veerender Reddy versus City Union Bank Limited

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

Varalakshmamma Powerlooms versus City Union Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus M Chakrapani