Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Bujji Bai Farms

DRT17 Apr 2026OA/560/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by a bank against a partnership firm and individual guarantors for recovery of a defaulted term loan. With respondents appearing ex-parte and defendants failing to fileWritten Statements, the Tribunal held the bank proved its case and directed repayment of the principal, interest, and costs, permitting proceedings against mortgaged

What did the court decide?

Declared joint and several liability to pay Rs. 2,94,76,581.51 with interest @ 9.35% p.a.; permitted proceeds against mortgaged properties; issued Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Bujji Bai Farms — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SR! cUMMADt cOptCHAND, PRESIDtNG OFFICER

¶3

OA. No.560 OF 2025

¶4

Between :

¶5

Union Bank of lndia, Husnabad Branch, 81 1 131, Akkannapet Road, Husnabad,

¶6

Karimnagar - 505 467, T.S. Represented by its Branch Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. BujjiBaiFarms Partnership Firm, Rep. by its Mg. Partner, Mr. Bukhya Lokesh, S/o. TirupathiNayak, # 9-1-22512, Bhagath Nagar, Karimnagar- 505 001

¶10

Also at -

¶11

Sy. No. 2531 NB, 253lBt 1 1212, 253tct2,253tN2, Jillella Gadda Village, Husnabad Mandal, Siddipet District - 505 467.

¶12

1 7 cne .nrc

¶13

(OA. No. s60/202s)

¶14

Mr. Bukhya Lokesh Naik, S/o. TirupathiNayak, Age : 33 years, Male, #342, Yellareddy Peta Mandal, Garjanapalle Mandal Karimnagar - 505 305

¶15

Also at -

¶16

9-1-22512, Bhagath Nagar, Karimnagar- 505 001

¶17

Mr. Bukhya Murali Krishna, S/o. Tirupathi Nayak,

¶18

Age: Major, Male, #342, Yellareddy Peta Mandal, Garjanapalle Mandal Karimnagar - 505 305

¶19

Also at -

¶20

9-1 -22512, Bhagath Nagar, Karimnagar- 505 001

¶21

Mrs. Guguloth Sunitha, Wo. Tirupathi Nayak, Age: Major, Female, #342, Yellareddy Peta Mandal, Garjanapalle Mandal Karimnagar - 505 305

¶22

Also at -

¶23

9-1 -22512, Bhagath Nagar, Karimnagar- 505 001

¶24

(oA. No. s60/202s)

¶25

Mr. Bukhya Thirupathi, S/o. Ramulu, Age: Major, Male, #342, Yellareddy Peta Mandal, Garjanapalle Mandal Karimnagar - 505 305

¶26

Alsoat-
#9-1-22512,BhagathNagar, Karimnagar- 505001
Counsel fortheparties:
For TheApplicant	SrinivasaRao Chakrala
Forthe Defendant	Exparte
Reservedon	13.04.2026
Pronouncedon	17.04.2026
Uploadinwebsiteon	17.04.2026

¶27

Defendants

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for total sum of Rs.2,94,76,581.51 Ps. (Rupees Two Four Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand and Paise Fifty One Only) with

¶30

[email protected] p with monthly rests from 29.10.2025 1 l nps 2ff26

¶31

r,a - ^:r 'Q;;r.nP

¶32

(oA. No. s60/202s)

¶33

till the date of realization and in default for sale of Mortgage Properties as mentioned in the Schedule of Properties to OA.

¶34

¶35

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant No. 1 is a^partnership Firm represented by its Managing Partners Defendants No. 2 to 5 availed Term Loan of Rs.3.00 crores repayabre in 78 EMrs at monthly instailments of Rs.3,84,616/- together with interest @9.35% p.a with monthly rests and executed Hypothecation Agreement dated 06.07.2024 in favor of the Appticant Bank. The Defendants No. 2 and 5 stood as a Guarantor and executed Deed of Guarantee dated 06.07.2024 in favor of the Appricant Bank. The Defendants created Equitable Mortgage morefufly mentioned in schedure of Propertles to OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 29.06.2024 in favor of the Appticant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank crassified the account as NPA and issued Demand Notice dated 04.10.2025 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAEST Act, 2OO2 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶36

Sri. A. Vijay Kumar filed Vakalat on behalf of Defendants No.1 to 5. Even after the lapse of 45 Days WS of Defendants No.1 filed and hence the right of filing of WS of 5 was forfeited on 13.04.2026.

¶37

,EP
j,[
ltrrpg
.1 4

¶38

(oA. No. s60/202s)

¶39

Sri Kushal Patsa, Assistant Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A..17.

¶40

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶41

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶42

Defendants no. No.1 to 5 did not file their WS even after availing sufficient time and hence the right of filing of WS of Defendants No. 1 to 5 was forfeited. . To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Appticant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to 4.17. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entiiled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶43

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under :

¶44

The Defendants No. 1 to 5 are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2,94,76,581.51^ps. Grores Ninety Four Lakhs Seventy Six ,d.Thd Hundred Eighty One and Paise Fifty One * ,*1,.,e 7 ApF ?026

¶45

(oA. No. s50/202s)

¶46

only) with future interest @9.35% p.a from 29.10.2025 tiil the date of realization.

¶47

The Applicant Bank is entifled to proceed against the Mortgaged Properties as mentioned in the Schedule of Properties to the OA towards realizationofthedebtdue.

¶48

The Applicant Bank is also entifled to proceed against the person and properties of Defendants No. 2 to 5 and properties of Defendant No. 1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶49

That Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.

¶50

The Applicant shail fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶51

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶52

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶53

(Dictated to.-the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open @urt on this the 17rh day ofApr, 2026)

¶54

//&
/lp (G. coPrcHAifl;
* PRESIDING OFFICER
1.4
ff,"dw
',;+?:rffi,n

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Bujji Bai Farms

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S. Bujji Bai Farms

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

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Vattikuti Sridevi

Canara Bank versus M/S. Karnem Upender

Smt Koheer Vanitha versus Punjab National Bank

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Sri. Veeramaneni Someshwar Rao

Intelligentia Mansions Private Limited versus Asset Reconstructions Co. India Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Hotcrete Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.