Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/s Pallavi Pharma

DRT23 Jun 2026OA/639/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna allowed Union Bank of India's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for recovery of Rs. 1.46 crore. Proceeding ex-parte against non-appearing defendants, the Tribunal accepted bank evidence and determined the debt amount with pending and future interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,46,81,006.54 along with pendente-lite and future interest at 9.65% p.a. from 05.12.2024; issuance of Recovery Certificate; attachment of mortgaged assets.

Union Bank of India versus M/s Pallavi Pharma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

OA 639 of2024jJI

DRT, PATNA

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶5

Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶6

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶7

OA Case No. 639 of 2024

¶8

Union Bank of India, branch office situated at Asset Recovery Branch, First Floor, Steel House, Near S.K. Puri Check Post, Boring Road, Patna (earlier at Muzaffarpur Main Branch, District- Muzaffarpur

¶9

. . . . . . .Applicant

¶10

Vs.

¶11

M/s Pallavi Pharma (Borrower), under the proprietorship of Mr, Keshav Kumar, S/o Sri Yugal Kishore Singh, situated at- B.P. Complex, lst Floor, New Market, Saraiyaganj, Muzaffarpur, Bihar 842001, PAN No. ARPPK8443D

¶12

Keshav Kumar, (Borrower), S/o Sri Yugal Kishore Singh, situated at Patahi Rup, P.O.- Patahi, P.S.- Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur, Bihar 842001, PAN No. ARPPK8443D

¶13

Shravan Kumar Thakur (Mortgagor/Guarantor), S/o 'Late Siyaram Thakur, resident of village- Patahi Rup. P.O.- Patahi, P.S.- Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur, Bihar 842001

¶14

Madhav Kumar (Guarantor), S/o Yugal Kishore Singh, resident of village + P.O.- Dayalpur, Thana- Rajapakar, District- Vaishali (Bihar)844101

¶15

Anish Kumar (Guarantor), S/o Harishankar Mishra, resident of villageJagdishpur, Sakra, District- Muzaffarpur. Bihar- 843 139

¶16

. . . . . . . Defendants

¶17

Present:

¶18

For the Applicant Shri Prashant Kumar, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶19

Dated :23.06.2026

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on

OA 639 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

05.12.2024 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.1,46,81,006.54 as on 31.10.2024 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 01.11.2024 with costs till realization.

¶26

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶27

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of Veteneary Medicines, of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendant no. 3 to 5 are the guarantor. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of cash credit facility of Rs.50 Lakh, vide loan application, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 23.09.2014 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶28

Defendants again approached the applicant bank for enhancement of cash credit facility of Rs.50 Lakh to Rs.100 Lakh, vide loan application, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 21.09.2017 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created/extended mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶29

Defendants again approached the applicant bank for enhancement of cash credit facility of Rs.100 Lakh to Rs.150 Lakh, vide loan application dated 16.11.2018, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 21.11.2018 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents and also created/extended mortgage in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶30

Defendants once again approached the applicant bank for sanction of Term Loan of Rs.30 Lakh under UGECL Scheme, vide loan application, which

OA 639 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 01.06.2020 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA.

¶35

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities, the defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 16.01.2024.

¶36

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶37

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.1,46,81,006.54 as on 31.10.2024 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 01. 11 .2024 till the realization.

¶38

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 18.12.2024, requiring them to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993. But the defendants have not appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 01.11.2025 in ''Dainik Jagran” and “The Times of India” newspapers.

¶39

Despite the registered summons/notices and publication of notice in newspaper, the defendants have not appeared before this Tribunal to contest the case. The sufficient time has been given to the defendants to defend their case, but they failed to appear and to file WS, hence, the Tribunal has passed an order to proceed ex-parte against the defendants on 18.02.2026.

%\l

OA 639 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this TribUnal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Rana Ratnesh Ranjan, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶45

St.No	Description of	1 Date of	Amount	Signature	of	Ex./
	Documents	Execution	(in	Executants		Ann
	Photocopies		Lakh			No
1	Loanapplication		noT	Def.no.2		1
2	Sanction advice	23.09.2014	50.00	Bank accepted def.no.2	and by	2
3	Hypothecation agreement	23.09.2014	50.00	Def.no.1&2		3
4	Suppl. agreement	23.09.2014	50.00	Def.no.1&2		4
5	Letterofm	23.09.2014	50.00	Def.no.1&2		5
6	Agreementonrate ofinterest	23.09.2014	50.00	Def.no.I&2		6
7	Letterofguarantee	23.09.2014	50.00	Def.no.2to5		7
8	Photocopy of simple mortgagedeed	24.09.2014				8
9	Sanctiorm	22.09.2017	100.00	Bank accepted defendants	ma by
10	Hypothecation agreement	07.10.2017	100.00	Def.no.1&2		10
11	Dm	07.10.2017	100.00	Def.no.1&2		11
12	Letterofundertaking	07.10.2017	100.00	Def.no.1&2		12
13	Interestagreement	07.10.2017	100.00	De£no.I&2		13
14	Letter ofcontinui1		100.00	Def.no.1&2		14
15	Letter ofguarantee	07.10.2017	100.00	Def.no.2to5		15
16	Photocopym) mortgagedeed	06.10.2017				16
17	ADDlication	16.11.2018		Def.no.1&2		17
18	Sanction letter	21.11.2018	150.00	Bank ' accepted Defendants	and by	18
19	SUDDl.Agreement	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.1&2		19
20	DPnote	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.I&2		20
21	Letter ofundertakin;	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.1&2		21
22	Letter of confirmation	21.11.2018	150.00	De£no.1,2,4&	5	22
23	Interestagreement	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.I&2		23
24	Letter ofundertakin!	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.1&2		24
25	Letter ofcontinuiD		150.00	Def.no.1&2		25
26	Letterofguarantee	21.11.2018	150.00	De£no.3&5		26
27	Letterofu	21.11.2018	150.00	Def.no.3&5		27
28	Sanction letter	01 .06.2020	30.00	Bank		28
29	General termloan agreement	01.06.2020	30.00	Def.no.I&2		29
30	Letter of undertakii£	ml6.2020	30.00	Def,nba		30
31	Letter ofundertakinj	01.06.2020	30.00	Def.no.I&2		31
32	Letter ofcontinuit'		30.00	Def.no.I&2		32

OA 639 of 20241JI

DRT, PATN A

Composite hyDothecationdeed	01.06.2020	180.00	1Def.no.l&2
Letter ofguarantee	01.06.2020	30.00	Def.no.3&5
Notice	02.02.2023		Bank
Notice	01.03.2023		Bank
mo	04. 12.2023		Bank
Notice	03.01.2024		Bank
debit Composite balanceconfirmation	16.01.2024		De£no.2,3&5
of Statement accounts

¶51

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶52

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶53

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings. of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶54

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 lacs. The applicant bank is fbnctioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application.

¶55

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 16.01.2024, whereas the present application has been filed on 05.12.2024. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

OA 639 of 20241 Jl

DRT, PATN A

Shri Rana Ratnesh Ranjan, Chief Manager of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶61

14 Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (1) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶62

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶63

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker’s Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker’s Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶64

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bunkers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certifIed copy of any entry in a banker’s book shaH in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶65

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

¶66

On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of hInds advanced by applicant

V\h

DRT1 PATN A

OA 639 of 20241 Jl

bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in the Statement of Account.

¶72

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 31.10.2024 has been proved to be Rs.1,46,81,006.54 only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶73

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.1,46,81,006.54 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 9.65% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 05.12.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of justice.

¶74

ORDER

¶75

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant bank its debt amounting to Rs.1,46,81,006.54 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 9.65% p.a. with compounded monthly rests from 05.12.2024 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶76

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶77

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the

OA 639 of 20241JI

DRT, PATNA

Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶82

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants. The Recovery OffIcer will issue demand notice to the CertifIcate debtors only after the proof of compliance under rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules 1993, is submitted by the applicant. If The Applicant /Certi$cate holder fails to comply with directions of the Recovery OffIcer, the execution may be dismissed for non-prosecution. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶83

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 04.08.2026. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶84

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 23’d day of June, 2026.

¶85

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶86

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶87

¶88

£QRbl NQ. 9

¶89

[See Regulation 24(1 )]

¶90

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶91

2nd Floor+ (A. B & F Wing) Kwpwi Thakw Sadan. Kendriya Karamchui Parisar (GPC}A), Ashiana Digha Road, PaUla-800025.

¶92

RECOVERy CERTIFICATE UNDER SEeTIQN I9fD REAP WITH SECTION 19(22) OF THE RECQVBIIY OF DEBTS & BANKRUPTCY AgT9W& AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

RC No. 165/2026

Case No: OA/639/2024

In the Matter of

(CH- 1) UNION BANK OF INDIA

¶98

(EARLIER AT MUZAFFARPUR MArN BRANCH DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR) BRANCH OFFICE SITUATED AT ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH. FIRST FLOOR. STEEL HOUSE, NEAR S.K. PURI CHECK POST. BORING ROAD PATNA

Applicant(s)

PATN A ,BIHAR -0

–--- Versus –––

(CD. 1) M/S PALLAVI PHARMA

¶104

under the proprietorship of Mr. Keshav Kumar, S/o Sri Yugal Kishore Singh, situated at- B.P. Complex, 1 st Floor, New Market Suruiyaganj,

¶105

MuzafFarpur .BIHAR -84200 1

¶106

(CD- 2) KESHAV KUMAR (BORROWER)

¶107

S/0. SRI YUGAL KISHORE SINGH, SITUATED AT.PATAHI

¶108

RUP. P.0.. PATAHI. P.S.- SADAR, DISTRICT-

¶109

MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR- 84200 1

¶110

(CD. 3) SHRAVAN KUMAR THAKUR

¶111

(MORTGAGOR/GUARANTOR) S/O. LATE SIYARAM THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLPATAHI RUP. P.0.- PATAHI. P.S.- SADAR DISTRICT-

¶112

Defendant(s)

¶113

MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR- 84200 1

¶114

(CD- 4) NIADHAV KUMAR (GUARANTOR)

¶115

S/0- YUGAL KISHORE SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE+P.0.- DAYALPUR. THANA- RAJAPAKAR

¶116

DISTRICT. VAISHALI(BIAHR). 844 101

¶117

(CD- 5) ANISH KUMAR (GUARANTOR)

¶118

S/0- HARISHANKAR MISHRA. RESIDENT OF VILLAGEJAGDISHPUR, SAKRA DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR,

¶119

BIHAR- 843 1 39

¶120

RHQVQry Certificate for Rg 146$100$1N I Rupees gIlt CrQK FQrty Six lIRkhS Ejghty IIne TbQH sands Six Aud PRiSe FifQ Four qlnjyJ

¶121

In terms of final order dated 23/06/2026 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 14681006.54 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 05/12/2024 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/639/2024 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶122

Sr.no CD Name Loan Int. Int. Effective Order ;} Interest(as on
T)Te . I)rpc/Mode Rate Date Date !Amount(Rs.): IBF Order AnD::(Rs.) Remark
Date)
Compound ,Jointly Interest As
1 M/S PALLAVI PHARMA Interest 9.65 05/ 12/2024 ,23/06/2026 : 1 468 1006.54 .And .on Order 1468 1006.54
(Monthly ) ;Severally Date
Compound :Jointly Interest As
2 KESFLAV KUMAR (BORROWER) Interest 9.65 05/ 12/2024 23/06/2026 : 1468 1 006.54 And in Order 1468 1 006.54
(Monthly ) :Severally !Date
SHRAVAN KUMAR THAKUR Compound :Jointly Intcrcst As
3 (MORTGAGOR/GUARANTOR) Intcrest(Monthly ) 9.65 05/12/2024 '23/06/2026 : 14681006.54 :SevcrallyAnd Date>n Order ' 1468 1006.54
Compound :Jointly Interest As
4 MADHAV KUMAR (GUARANTOR) Interest 9.65 .05/ 12/2024 i23/06/2026 : 14681006.54 And :on Order . 1468 1006.54
(Monthly ) ;Severally IDate
Compound Jointly Interest As
5 ANISH KUMAR (GUARANTOR) Interest 9.65 05/ 12/2024 23/06/2026 : 14681006.54 .And on Order .14681006.54
(Monthly ) ;Severally .Date

¶123

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, ' same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶124

The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Ban}auptcy Act 1993

¶125

Parties are directed to appear before MAN(H KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on CH/08/2026

¶126

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (as amcndcd from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors

¶127

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribural on this 24/06/2026

¶128

q-/
_ RegIstrar
D e:IRe:I::I;f :We:n a

¶129

P OFFICER
DEBTS RECOVERY IUNAL PATNA

¶130

FORM NO. 10 [See Regulation 24(2)]

¶131

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶132

2nd Floorp (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶133

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 165/2026

Case No: OA/639/2024

Applicant(s): UNION BANK OF INDIA

¶138

Versus

¶139

Defendant(s): M/S PALLAVI PHARMA

¶140

	Item ofCosts	iAmount inRs
	Feeontheapplicatibn	149000
i2	)rocessFees(Inc. Publication)	io
	AdvocateFees	io
	tommissioner/Receiver/Valuation/SecurityFee	jo
	MiscellaneousCharges	10
	Total Costs:Rs.	149000

¶141

Place: PATNA

¶142

Date: 24/06/2026

¶143

PRESIDrFG OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶144

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Union Bank of India v. M/s Pallavi Pharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/s Pallavi Pharma

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

Axis Bank versus Ashis Kumar

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Nirmala

State Bank of India versus Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta & Anr.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Shyam Traders

Bank of India versus Car Laundary

Nataraj S versus Bank of Maharashtra