Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Traders

DRT10 Aug 2026OA/543/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's Original Application for recovery of a loan amount against the Defendants. The Court held that the unchallenged evidence proved the defendants availed loans and failed to repay, rejecting the defense raised by one defendant.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.77,94,566.97 with interest; recovery of hypothecated movables permitted; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Mahalaxmi Traders — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THrS THE lOrH DAy OF AUGUST, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.543 ot 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

Union Bank of India. Jaakkapur branch. Sy.No.3 E, China koduru Mandal, Rajanna Sirciila district - 502 276.

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Mahalaxmi Traders, Represented by its partners,

¶10

1. Mr. Gunnala Anil kumar

¶11

1. Mr. Mandha SriOnai reOay

¶12

Shutter no.1&2 R/o 9_t_t37/A/A, Venkata Rao nagar, Sircilla, Rajanna, sircirrjoistrilt'_"ffi s :o r.

¶13

Mr. Gunna,a Anil Kumar, S/o Satyanarayana, iged ll9 y"u.r,

¶14

R/o 9-t-73t/A/A.

¶15

Y:f"j:^{Rao nas'ar, Sirciila,} KaJanna, Sircilla district- SdS SOt.

¶16

3' M'r' Ir4andha sridhar Reddv- -',,'tllii ;;i;i
s/o Mandha r_acrri neOavl#uL,' ,l.1; "!fi
aged 39 years, R/o g.ho.g_an ' l-:,
,
cneerlavancha, sircilla,:r
reransana _ sos 4o2i5 1 0 AUg ?026
td - "r Defendants
.s $'
IW
W

¶17

(oA.No.s43i 202s)

¶18

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Sri Srinivasa Rao Chakrala Defendant Sri l. Srinivas Orders reserved on 04.082026 Pronounced on 10.08.2026 Uploaded in website on 11.08.2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.71,94,566.g7ps (Rupees Seventy Seven Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Six and paise Eighty seven only) (Rs.72,3o,241.53ps + Rs.5,64,566.34ps ) with interest @ 9.05o/o p.a from 06.0g.2025 till the date of rearization and in defaurt for sale of hypothecated movabres as described in the schedule to OA.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that the defendant no.1 is a partnership firm represented by its partners/ defendants 2 and 3 avaired term roan and executed demand promissory note, acceptance letter, letter of continuity, letter of underr.:..K. The defendants hypothecated the movables in favour The defendants availed Rs.72,30,24L53ps plus ssu bmitted by the Applicant bank that the said loan facilities a nd failed to keep up the such the account was classified as NpA. 2

¶22

(OA. No.sa3l202s)

¶23

Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendants have not regularized the account, and the Applicant bank issued recall notice dated 01.07.2025, but the defendants did not come forward to repay the same. The total claim of Applicant against defendants is of Rs.77,94,566.87ps (Rupees Seventy Seven Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Six and paise Eighty seven only) (Rs.72,3O,241.53ps + Rs.5,64,566.34ps ) with interest @ 9.05o/o p.a from 06.08.2025 till the date of realization. Hence the OA.

¶24

The Defendant No.2 filed written statement admitting that they avaired various loan facirities from the Appricant bank. It is contended that the appricant bank crassified the loan account as NpA without fo'owing the guiderines of RBI. It is further contended that the bank has no cause of action and the OA is barred by limitation. Hence prayed for dismissal of OA.

¶25

I have perused the documents placed on record.

¶26

Heard the arguments.

¶27

Now, the poin nsideration are: 4^{-. ='+:>-,} i) t,the^Aps.fca as proved its claim as made in OA agai tn " l"trTf,nfi]* ii) To

¶28

(oA.No.sa3/202s)

¶29

Point No.i):

¶30

Mr' Mukul sharma, Branch Manager/ AW.1 who was examined on beharf of the Appricant crearry deposed about the riabirity of the defendant. Exhibits A.l to A.Z7 are marked through AW.1.

¶31

7' As per the documents fired by the Appricant Bank and arso as per the admissions made by the defendant in the written statement, it is very crear that the defendant has avaired roan from the Appricant Bank, but faired to repay the amount. AIr the amounts paid by the defendant are clearly mentioned in the statement of account filed by Applicant Bank. The defendant has not placed any material documents to show their bonafides for establishing that the Applicant bank failed to follow the RBI guidelines as per the norms.

¶32

AW.1 is not cross examined by the counsel for defendant. The defendant has not come forward to give evidence to substantiate that their riabirity is ress than the amount mentioned in the oA Under such circumstances, the evidence of AW.1 coupred with recitars Ex.A.1 to A.27 stood unchallenged and unrebutted. The Applicant bank crearry estabrished that the defendant is riabre to pay the oA amount to the Applicant bank.

¶33

8.^{".ffi</sup> "ilT^*i''t TlftTfii""1 inal application is allowed with costs as unHen: ,.-,, '' *Gi *t'fl}

¶34

(oA.No.s43l202s)

¶35

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.77,94,566.97ps (Rupees Seventy Seven Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Six and paise Eighty seven only) (Rs.72,30,241.53ps + Rs.5,64,S66.34ps ) with interest @ 9,05o/o p.a from 06.08.2025 till the date of realization;

¶36

The applicant bank is entiued to proceed against the hypothecated movabres as mentioned in the schedure to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶37

10' The Applicant bank is arso entired to proceed against the person and properties of defendants no.2 & 3 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶39

The Applicant shalr file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶40

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶41

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶42

this by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on
:/ ,8-
sd/-
ttP
;. ilF 6j5
(c. GoPtCHAND)
;i : 10 Aufr 2ffi PRESIDING OFFICER
rRrrE codyl
' g4''4fl
.,,g AsstXe{lttar
fu*d,d-.,.r'-'-,. I
\'-, 1 {'.t.ltwenagaa'

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Mahalaxmi Traders

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Nutangi Veera Venkata Satyanarayana

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Vani Educational Society

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Two Birds Travels

State Bank of India versus M/S. Mayuri Hospital

Ms Vijayalaxmi Enterprises versus Idfc First Bank Limited

Canara Bank versus M/S. Shiva Sai Textiles