Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Tusheet Saraf

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/764/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application seeking a recovery certificate against two defendants. The court, finding the defendants absent and the bank's evidence uncontroverted, directed issuance of a certificate for the due amount with interest capped at 6% per annum, without requiring a formal trial.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 20,14,768.95 plus further interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing till realization to be recovered jointly, severally, and personally from the defendan

Union Bank of India versus Tusheet Saraf — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of January, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.764/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Union Bank of India Branch office at: NIFT Campus Branch No.2735, Kousthubham Opp. NIFT College, 27^th Main Road, HSR Layout- Sector-1, Bangalore-560102 …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

Sri. Tusheet Saraf S/o. Santosh Saraf No.202, Wing A Shree A Shree 2 Riddhi Enclave SOC Near Ganapathi Chowak Viman Nagar Dukirkline Pune, Maharashtra- 411014

¶8

Permanent address at: No.78, East Boaring Road, Ward 6 (2), Patna, Bihar- 800001

¶9

Sri. Santosh Saraf S/o. Lal Saraf Flat No.2132, B Block, Prestige Notting Hill, Bannerghatta Road- 560076 ...DEFENDANTS

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Divya Purandar Defendants : Exparte

OA 764-2022

FINAL ORDER

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 Rs.20,14,768.95 (Rupees twenty lakh fourteen thousand seven hundred sixty eight and paisa ninety five only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a borrower and defendant No.2 as guarantor have availed the Education loan credit facilities of Rs.21,00,000/- ( Rupees twenty one lakh only) from the applicant bank.

¶17

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Demand promissory note, interest agreement and letter of undertaking in favor of the applicant bank.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

OA 764-2022

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 25.10.2024.

¶23

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-11 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶26

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶27

OA claim as against the defendants?

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶31

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The

¶32

OA 764-2022

¶33

¶34

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

¶35

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶36

this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶38

are availed by defendant for Education loan purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed

¶39

rate, this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @6% p.a.(Simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.764/2022 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶42

sum of Rs.20,14,768.95 (Rupees twenty lakh fourteen thousand

¶43

seven hundred sixty eight and paisa ninety five only) with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple),

¶44

OA 764-2022

¶45

¶46

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶47

jointly severally and personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the defendants Jointly severally and personally including their

¶48

other assets.

¶49

The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶50

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

¶51

receipt of the order.

¶52

iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this

¶53

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶54

iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶55

in terms of this final order.

¶56

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶57

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

¶58

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶59

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30^th day of January, 2026].

¶60

PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

OA 764-2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Sunita Mohanta, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶68

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	--	Original loan application
A2	15.04.2014	Demand promissory note
A3	15.04.2014	Original education loan agreement
A4	15.04.2014	Original Interest agreement
A5	15.04.2014	Letter of undertaking assigning future income
A6	09.10.2019 11.11.2019 10.12.2019	Original overdue notices
A7	22.12.2020	Original legal notice issued to defendants
A8	--	Original returned postal covers of defendant No.1 and D2
A9		Copy of certified true extract of statement of accounts for the term loan account bearing No.632806730000031
A10	15.04.2016	Copy of email of D1
A11	14.12.2020	Copy of email issued to the defendant from the applicant bank’s end

¶69

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶70

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Tusheet Saraf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Tusheet Saraf

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

S Rajeswari versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Kishan Mitrapal Chawla Dairy

Bank of India versus Ms Narmada Pipes

Ms Khajuria Constructions and Another versus State Bank of India

Raj Kumar Baniya versus State Bank of India

Smt Firoja Begum versus Indian Bank