Allowed

Uco Bank v. Mathru Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/518/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, granting issuance of a Recovery Certificate for a term loan default. The order reduced the interest rate to 8% p.a. (Simple) due to housing purpose and allowed recovery from property and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 3,17,03,807/- with interest @8% p.a. (Simple) against defendants jointly and severally, recoverable from scheduled property and other assets.

Uco Bank versus Mathru Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.518/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

UCO Bank

¶6

at No 13/22, Kemegowda Raod, Bangalore-560009, Respresented By Its

¶7

Assistant general Manager …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Mathru Buildtech Pvt Ltd

¶10

Having Its Office At No 100,7^th A Main, 3^rd Block, 4^th Stage, Basaveshwaranagar, Bangalore 560079

¶11

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar.M

¶12

Aged About 56 Years, S/o Somashekarappa, Managing Director, M/s MATHRU BUILDTECH PVT LTD Residing At No 4, Olety Kalyani, 1^st Main Road, 9^th Cross Nagarbhavi Main Raod, Kalian Nagar, Moddalpalya, Bangalore-560072

¶13

Mr. Sathish Kumar.M Aged About 54 Years, S/o Narayana Rao, Director, M/s MATHRU BUILDTRCH PVT LTD Residing at No 202, 7^th Main, 7^th Cross, Malleshwaram, Bangalore-560003

¶14

Mr.Umesh O K,

¶15

Aged About 50 Years, S/o Sri Omkarappa H, Director M/s MATHRU BUILDTRCH PVT LTD

¶16

OA 518/2022

¶17

¶18

Residing at No 92, Balaji Nagar, Vishwaneedam Byadarahalli, Bangalore-560091

¶19

Mr. Huckum Chand, Aged About 54 Years, S/o Sri Sashmal Chunilal Souhanaraj, Director, M/s MATHRU BUILDTECH PVT LTD Residing at No 37/1/3, S Kariyappa Road, Jayanagar, Bangalore-560004

¶20

M/s. Hebron Properties Pvt Ltd, A Private Limited Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act 1956, Having Its Registered Office At No 5,AC-712,5^th A Cross, 4^th Floor, HRBR Layout, First Block, Kalyan Nagar Post, Bengaluru 560043

¶21

...DEFENDANTS

¶22

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶23

Applicant : K R Parashuram Defendants : Exparte

¶24

FINAL ORDER

¶25

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶26

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶27

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.3,17,03,807/- (Rupees Three Crore Seventeen Lakh Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶28

OA 518/2022

¶29

¶30

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed an term loan of Rs 4,11,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore Eleven Lakh Only).

¶31

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Tripartite Agreement.

¶32

It is further contended that, the defendants despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶33

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.

¶34

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 19.01.2026.

¶35

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-17 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶36

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered

¶37

OA 518/2022

¶38

¶39

the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶40

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶41

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶42

OA claim as against the defendants?

¶43

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶44

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶45

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. 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

¶46

as stated in the OA, creation of mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is

¶47

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

¶48

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶49

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

¶50

OA 518/2022

¶51

¶52

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶53

are availed by defendants for Housing purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest

¶54

@8% p.a. (Simple).

¶55

In the result, OA.No.518/2022, stands allowed,

¶56

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶57

sum of Rs.3,17,03,807/- (Rupees Three Crore Seventeen Lakh

¶58

Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Seven Only)with further interest @8% 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 amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶59

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants

¶60

jointly severally and personally and his other assets are liable to

¶61

be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶62

OA 518/2022

¶63

¶64

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶65

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

¶66

receipt of the order.

¶67

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

¶68

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶69

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

¶70

in terms of this final order.

¶71

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶72

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶73

[Dictated to the Stenographer (ms), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30^th day of June, 2026].

¶74

SD/(T. RAJESH)

¶75

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶76

ANNEXURES

¶77

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶78

AW-1: Mr.Ashok Kumar Tripathy, chief Manager, of the Applicant Bank.

¶79

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶80

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.

¶81

OA 518/2022

¶82

¶83

A1	The copy of the loan application
A2	The copy of the sanction letter dated 04.08.2016
A3	The copy of the certificate of incorporation
A4	The copy of the on demand promissory note in form A-1 dated 08.08.2016
A5	The copy of the revival letter in form AHL-8 dated 08.08.2016 executed by defendants
A6	The copy of the form AHL-7 dated 08.08.2016 executed by defendants
A7	The copy of the loan agreement in form A-6 dated 08.08.2016
A8	The copy of the affidavit cum undertaking submitted by the defendants dated 09.08.2016
A9	The copy of the letter of guarantee in form AHL-13 executed by defendant no 2
A10	The copy of the letter of guarantee in form AHL-13 executed by defendant no 3
A11	The copy of the letter of guarantee in form AHL-13 executed by defendant no 4
A12	The copy of the letter of guarantee in form AHL-13 executed by defendant no 5
A13	The copy of the loan of undertaking and indemnity dated 08.08.2016 executed by defendants
A14	The copy of the agreement towards sale of land dated 28.06.2016 entered into by sir M Goavindaswamy Naidu and others
A15	The copy of the construction agreement entered into by defendant no 6 with defendant no 1
A16	The copy of the tripartite agreement dated 05.08.2016
A17	The copy of the statement of account and certificate
Witnes	s Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶84

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶85

SD/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Uco Bank v. Mathru Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Mathru Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Anugya Enterprises

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/s Maa Sharde Agritech

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Balajee Coal Depot

Manoj Kumar Sharma versus Punjab National Bank

Sri Ram Bhagat Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Niraj Marble and Tiles and Ors.