Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Poonam Enterprises

DRT24 Jun 2026OA/737/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate against two defendants for a claimed debt of Rs. 30,10,891.85 along with interest, finding the evidence uncontroverted due to the defendants appearing ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 30,10,891.85 plus 12% simple interest from filing date till realization, recoverable from defendants jointly and severally against scheduled properties.

Union Bank of India versus Poonam Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.737/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Union Bank of India Branch office at: No.114, MG road, Bengaluru – 560 001

¶6

Rep. by its Branch Manager Mr. Krishnamurthy V …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

M/s. Poonam Enterprises No. 714, 7^th Floor, Barton Centre, M G Road, Bangalore – 560 001 Rep. its Proprietrix Mrs. Poonam Kocchar

¶9

Mr. Puneeth Kocchar S/o. S C Kocchar Aged about 51 years No.2037, 17^th main, 1^st cross, Hal 2^nd Stage, Bangalore – 560 008 ...DEFENDANTS

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Shivashankar A Defendants : Ex parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for

¶14

2 OA-737/2022

¶15

Rs. 30,10,891.85/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Ten Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety-One and Paisa Eighty-Five Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed the following credit facilitates:

¶17

Cash Credit-revision of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only).

¶18

WCTL loan of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only).

¶19

Term Loan of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only).

¶20

Demand loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Only).

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with hypothecation deed.

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 04.02.2025.

¶25

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-34 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

3 OA-737/2022

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. 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 facilities as stated in the OA,

¶33

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶34

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶37

4 OA-737/2022

¶38

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at

¶39

by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view

¶40

that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.737/2022, stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶42

Rs. 30,10,891.85/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Ten Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety-One and Paisa Eighty-Five Only) with further interest @12.00% 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

¶43

the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶44

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the

¶45

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶46

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

5 OA-737/2022

¶50

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

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

¶52

terms of this final order.

¶53

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶54

terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT

¶55

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶56

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of June, 2026].

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICE

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1: Cyril Monterio, S/o. Franck Monterio, Chief Manager, of

¶62

Applicant Bank.

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhi	bit	Particulars
A1 A3	to	Loan application dated 29.05.2015, sanction letter dated 29.05.2015 & demand promissory note dated 30.05.2015 executed by the first defendant
A4		Take delivery letter dated 30.05.2015 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kachhar
A5		Letter of undertaking dated 30.05.2015 executed by executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A6		Hypothecation movable dated 30.05.2015 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kachhar
A7		Guarantee agreement dated 30.05.2015 executed by the second defendant in favour of applicant/plaintiff
A8	&	Demand promissory note dated 31.03.2018 & take delivery letter
A9		dated 31.03.2018 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A10 A11	&	Letter application dated 29.07.2019, sanction letter dated 29.07.2019 issued by the applicant/plaintiff bank

¶65

6 OA-737/2022

¶66

A12 & A13	Demand Promissory Note dated 28.08.2019 & take delivery letter dated 28.08.2019 executed byMrs. Poonam Kochhar
A14	Agreement for term loan dated 28.08.2019 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrixofthefirst defendant
A15	Letter of undertaking dated 28.08.2019 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A16	Hypothecation movable dated 30.05.2015 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kachhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A17	Guarantee agreement dated 28.08.2019 executed by the second defendant
A18	Composite debit balance confirmation dated 16.01.2021 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A19	Composite debit balance confirmation dated 16.01.2021 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A20	Statement of account extract loan account bearing no. 560101000100256
A21	Statement of account extract loan account bearing no. 560716000012123
A22 to A24	Loan application dated 30.05.2020, sanction letter dated 30.05.2020 & demand promissory note dated 10.06.2015 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A25	Letter of undertaking dated 01.06.2020 executed by executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A26	Term loan agreement (hypothecation of movable) dated 10.06.2020 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar, the proprietrix of the first defendant
A27	Composite hypothecation deed dated 10.06.2020 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A28	Hypothecation (book Debts) Agreement dated 10.06.2020 executed byMrs. Poonam Kachhar
A29	Guarantee for line of credit & Term loan dated 10.06.2020 executed by the second defendant
A30	Statement of account extract bearing no. 5607160000098938
A31 to A32	Sanction letter dated 02.05.2020 & demand promissory note dated 26.06.2020 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A33	Take delivery letter dated 26.06.2020 executed by Mrs. Poonam Kochhar
A34	Statement of Account Extract loan account bearing no. 5607160000044122

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶72

Sd/-

Union Bank of India v. Poonam Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Poonam Enterprises

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

State Bank of India versus Haja Majmudeen Abdul Razak

Union Bank of India versus M/s Pallavi Pharma

Ms Joysri Enterprises versus Indian Bank

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Haji Mohammad Sultan Sofi

Ellaquai Dehati Bank versus Ghulam Rasool Mir

Keshav Prasad Choubey versus Shubham Housing Development Finance Company Limited