Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Radhe Dairy Farm and Another

DRT6 Aug 2026OA/548/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues from M/s Radhe Dairy Farm. The Tribunal dismissed the case ex-parte due to non-appearance of defendants and decreed the principal amount along with simple interest at 8% p.a. instead of the claimed rate, granting a Recovery Certificate and permitting execution proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 24,54,949.27 with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to attach and sell assets.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Radhe Dairy Farm and Another — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.548/2026

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 07.04.2026

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 06.08.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate, duly constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021, and one of its Branches at Dugri Road, Ludhiana through Sh. Gaurav Mishra its Branch Manager, Principal Officer and Constituted Attorney.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Radhe Dairy Farm, Dhandra Road, Sua Road, Ludhiana through its Proprietor Sh. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sh. Nanak Chand.

¶10

Sh. Rakesh Kumar S/o Sh. Nanak Chand, Proprietor M/s Radhe Dairy Farm, Dhandra Road, Sua Road, Ludhiana. 2^nd Address:-

¶11

H. No. 448, Sham Nagar, Near Bus Stand, Ludhiana.

¶12

…….. Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. R.V. Mehra, Advocate for the applicant (through VC) None for defendants (Already ex-parte vide order dated 04.08.2026).

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.24,54,949.27 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Nine and Paise Twenty Seven Only). The Original Application has been filed throug h Sh. Gaurav Mishra, Branch Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 10.12.2018, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

2 OA NO.548/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RADHE DAIRY FARM AND ANOTHER

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 a pproached the applicant for grant of Term Loan Facility of Rs.17,80,000.00 and Cash Credit Limit of Rs.7,00,000.00 vide Application Form for MSMEs dated 03.12.2024, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan Facility of Rs.17,80,000.00 and Cash Credit Limit of Rs.7,00,000.00 vide Sanction Letter dated 06.12.2024, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no. 1 through defendant no. 2 hypothecated its stocks, book debts and machinery, vide Composite Hypothecation Deed, dated 11.12.2024, which is Annexure A14 to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed: Demand Promissory Notes, Hypothecation (Goods & Debts) Agreement, Letters of Continuity, Simple Agreement, Term Loan Agreement (Hypothecation of Movables), General Term Loan Agreement, Interest Agreement, Letter of Undertaking from Borrowers, , all dated 11.12.2024, which are Annexures A4 to A13 to this OA; Legal Notice dated 17.03.2026, along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A15 to A18 to this OA; Statement of Accounts along with certificates, which are Annexures A19 & A20 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.24,54,949.27, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served summons to appear before this Tribunal. Ms Garima Arora, Advocate appeared on behalf of defendants on 16.7.2026, but thereafter, no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 04.08.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Gaurav Mishra, Branch Manager, Union Bank of India has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶21

3 OA NO.548/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RADHE DAIRY FARM AND ANOTHER

¶22

It was argued by learned counsel for applicant through video conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A20 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 a pproached applicant for availing of loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, loan accounts were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.24,54,949.27 (Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Nine and Paise Twenty Seven Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶23

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.75%p.a. including penal interest @2% in both the accounts till the realization.

¶24

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶25

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant sum of Rs.24,54,949.27

¶26

4 OA NO.548/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS M/S RADHE DAIRY FARM AND ANOTHER

¶27

(Rupees Twenty Four Lacs Fifty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Nine and Paise Twenty Seven Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the both loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated assets of defendant no. 1 i n execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶28

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 21.08.2026.

¶31

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶32

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 06.08.2026 (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. M/S Radhe Dairy Farm and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Radhe Dairy Farm and Another

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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Parkash and Co. and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S Himanshu Fabrics and Others

Shubchintak versus Idfc First Bank Ltd. and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Malhotra Cycle Industries and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurmeet Singh Chahal

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Dalveer Singh