Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S Aha International and Another

DRT23 Jan 2026OA/787/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of outstanding dues from borrowers who failed to repay term loans and cash credit limits. The court granted a uniform simple interest rate and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay Rs. 23,73,262.41 with costs and simple interest @ 8.00% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; liberty to enforce claim through due process.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Aha International… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.787/2024

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.05.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.01.2026

¶6

Union Bank of India, a body corporate, constituted under Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai and having a Branch Office inter-alia at Assets Recovery Branch, G.T. Road, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana, through its duly authorized person and power of attorney holder Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Branch Manager.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s AHA International, Street no. 4 & 6, Sanyas Nagar, Phambra, Ludhiana Punjab 141008 (Through its prop. Nashima Begum, defendant no.1)

¶10

2^nd address: SATA, Nahar Logistic Park Pvt. Ltd., Khewat no.79/80 and 39/59, Khasra no.306, 348/305, 48 and 56, Near Katana Sahib Gurudwara, Ludhiana, Punjab-141001.

¶11

Smt. Nashima Begum wife of Sh. Afzal Hussain, resident of street no.4, Sanyas Nagar, Noorwala Road, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana 141007.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Amod Kumar Thakur, Advocate proxy for Sh. R.K. Chauhan, Advocate for applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex parte vide order dated 10.10.2025

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.23,73,262.41 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Two & Paise Forty One Only). The Original Application has been filed through

¶18

Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh Branch Manager, of the applicant, who is

¶19

¶20

OA NO.787/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS AHA INTERNATIONAL AND ANOTHER

¶21

competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 25.03.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶22

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no.2 approached the applicant for the grant of Term loan of Rs. 10.00 Lacs under MUDRA Scheme vide loan application dated 01.12.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no.1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for grant of Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 20.00 Lacs for working capital requirement vide loan application dated 20.04.2023, which is Annexure A19 to this OA.

¶23

The applicant sanctioned the Term loan of Rs. 10.00 Lacs vide memorandum of sanction dated 01.12.2022, which is Annexure A7 to this OA; Sanction Letter dated 02.12.2022, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and terms and conditions of sanction, which is Annexure A9 to this OA were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 20.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 24.04.2023, which is Annexure A20 to this OA and terms and conditions of sanction, which is Annexure A21 to this OA were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the CC Limit was enhanced by the applicant to Rs. 50.00 Lacs along with sanction of Fresh Term Loan of Rs. 22.00 Lacs and Bank Guarantee of Rs. 25.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 04.10.2024, which is Annexure A16 to this OA.

¶24

Defendant no. 1 through its proprietor hypothecated stock of garments, finished/semi-finished goods, stock of fabrics, yarns, accessories, etc. vide Term Loan Agreement (Hypothecation of Moveables) dated 02.12.2022, which is Annexure A13 to this OA; Hypothecation (Goods and Debts) Agreement, dated 24.04.2023, which is Annexure A25 to this OA. Documents executed: - GST Registration dated 17.10.02017, along with its Annexure–A & Annexure-B, which are Annexures A3 to A5

¶25

¶26

OA NO.787/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS AHA INTERNATIONAL AND ANOTHER

¶27

to this OA; Udyog Aadhaar Registration, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Demand Promissory note, Letter of Continuity, General Term Loan Agreement, Letter of undertaking from borrower, AD-02A, Deed of guarantee, letter of undertaking from guarantor, application for disbarment of loan, all dated 02.12.2022, which are Annexures A9 to A12, A14 to A18 to this OA; Undertaking Annexure A-VI, Demand Promissory note, Letter of Continuity, AD-02A, Letter of undertaking not to alienate hypothecated goods, letter of undertaking from borrower, deed of guarantee, letter of undertaking from guarantor, all dated 24.04.2023, which are Annexures A21 to A24, A26 to A30 to this OA; Notice and letter by bank dated 17.0.62023, 10.07.2023, 11.08.2023, 22.09.2023 & 05.10.2023 which are Annexures A31 (Colly) to A35 (Colly) to this OA; Notice by bank to defendant no.1 & 2, both dated 01.11.2023, which are Annexures A36 & A37 to this OA; Legal notice dated 30.10.2023 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A38 to this OA and Statement of accounts with certificate, which are Annexures A39 to A42 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.23,73,262.41, 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 notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex parte vide order dated 10.10.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Prabhat Ranjan Singh Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,

¶28

¶29

OA NO.787/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS AHA INTERNATIONAL AND ANOTHER

¶30

the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A42 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.23,73,262.41 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Two & Paise Forty One Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶31

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.30%p.a. with 2% penal interest and monthly rests in Term loan and interest @11.55%p.a. with 2% penal interest and monthly rests in CC Limit from 02.05.2024 till the realization.

¶32

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 mortgaged property/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 uniform 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.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶34

¶35

OA NO.787/2024 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS MESSRS AHA INTERNATIONAL AND ANOTHER

¶36

Rs.23,73,262.41 (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Two & Paise Forty One Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the 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 defendants in 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.

¶37

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 05.02.2026.

¶40

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.

¶41

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 23.01.2026.

¶42

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Union Bank of India v. M/S Aha International and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S Aha International 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Kulwinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Alliance Paints and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

State Bank of India versus Sh. Hira Singh

Axis Bank versus Sh. Harjinder Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Rakesh Kumar Alias Rakesh Kumar Aggarwal and Another