Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/s. R S Engineers & Consultants.

DRT18 Feb 2026OA/381/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 54,37,360.58 from defendants who remained absent. The court directed recovery through sale of hypothecated assets and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directed to pay Rs.54,37,360.58 with future interest; OA claim secured by hypothecated assets; entitled to proceed against person and properties; issue Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. R S Engineers & Consultants. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE lBTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDlNG OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 381 OF 2025

¶6

Un ion Bank of Indla., UMFB Ma llapu r Branch Hyderabad, 14edchal - Malkajgiri District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

lvl/s. RS Engineers & Consultants., Situated at First Floor, 1-1-560/115 Priya Apa rtments, Gandh inagar Hyderabad - 500020.

¶10

lYr. Ravishanker Krishnamu rthy Tanjavur, Age 50 Years, Occ: Business R/o. Flat No.316, Priya Apartments 1-1-560, Near Golkonda X Road PO Gandhinagar, H yd e ra ba d^- 5 0 0 0 20. Sole Proprietor of M/s. R S Engineers & Consultants.

¶11

... Defenda nts

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant : [4r, K. l4urali Babu

Defendants

: Ex- parte

:: O-LLE& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.54,3 7,360.58ps as on 08.04.2025 towards Term Loan as well as Cash Credit Loan from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @24olo^p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in Jnr- -, ,

¶17

default for sale of hypothecated assets. .,6.,1;-r..

¶18

oA.NO.381/2025

¶19

¶20

Summons served on Dl & 2. They were set ex-parte on 23.70.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined Srinivas Gugulothu, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 20 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.20.

¶22

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

¶23

5, The point that arises for conslderation is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assets?

¶25

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.20 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶26

In the result, the present Original Application No.381/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶27

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.54,37,360.58ps as on 08.04.2025 towards Term Loan as well as Cash Credit Loan with

firy:',,u

oA.NO.381/202s

future interest @9.05o/o^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and^the applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of this order to the^{parties concerned.} (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and^pronounced by me in the open^{court on} this the 18th Day of February, 2026).

¶38

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/s. R S Engineers & Consultants.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/s. R S Engineers & Consultants.

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

Ganesh Rajesh versus Yms Finance Private Limited

Gummadavelli Ganesh versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Turpu Ramesh versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Venkateswara Agencies.

Punjab National Bank versus Shri Pulluri Sairam

Canara Bank versus M/s. Chandana Apparels