Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Kunal Pipe Industreis

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/890/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Bank of Maharashtra seeking a recovery certificate against M/s. Kunal Pipe Industries for a cash credit loan default. The court permitted reduced interest at 12% p.a. and directed recovery from joint, several, and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 1,03,14,734/- plus 12% p.a. simple interest to be recovered from joint, several, and personal assets and schedule properties.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. Kunal Pipe Industreis — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

pIN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^th Day of July, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.890/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Bank of Maharashtra Branch office at: City Market, Basavangudi, Bangalore – 560 004 Represented by Chief Manager Nishit Chandra …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

M/s. Kunal Pipe Industries A partnership firm, Represented by its Partners,

¶8

Sri. Kunal Bharath Ruparel S/o. Bharath Ruparel Aged about 35 years

¶9

Smt. Meera Bharath Ruparel W/o. Bharath Ruparel Aged about 64 years

¶10

Both are residing at: No. M-6, 26^th Main Road, Near RV dental collage, LIC colony, 1^st phase, JP Nagar Bangalore – 560 058 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : G K Suresh Associates. Defendants : Ex parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶15

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993

¶16

2 OA-890/2023

¶17

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 1,03,14,734/- (Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty-Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed a Cash credit loan of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crores Only).

¶19

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

¶20

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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.

¶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 ex parte on 14.11.2025.

¶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-08 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

¶25

3 OA-890/2023

¶26

and proof affidavit.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

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

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the 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.

¶32

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.

¶33

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is

¶34

availed for business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view

¶35

4 OA-890/2023

¶36

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

¶37

In the result, OA.No.890/2023, stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.1,03,14,734/- (Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty-Four 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 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.

¶38

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

¶39

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶40

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶41

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶42

5 OA-890/2023

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶46

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^th Day of July, 2026].

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICE

¶49

ANNEXURES

¶50

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶51

AW-1: Sri. K V Hariprakash, S/o. Vaithiyanathan, Manager, of

¶52

Applicant Bank.

¶53

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶54

Exhibits	Description
A1	Intimation to the sanction letter dated 05.02.2021
A2	On demand promissory note executed by the partners of defendant firm, dated 05.02.2021
A3	Deed of hypothecation for all facilities executed by the partners of defendant firm, dated 05.02.2021
A4	Guarantee for all facilities except agricultural facilities executed by the partners of defendant firm, dated 05.02.2021
A5	Deed of declaration/undertakings executed by the partners of defendant firm, dated 05.02.2021
A6	Office copy of the legal notice, dated 14.01.2023
A7	Two postal acknowledgments, dated 08.02.2023
A8	Statement of account
	Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -
	List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH)

¶57

PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Kunal Pipe Industreis

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Kunal Pipe Industreis

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

Canara Bank versus Ms Kalka Packaging

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Fine Line Retails Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ramappa G Khanagoudar

Mrs Azaz Fatima versus Hero Housing Finance Limited

M/s Pannalal Associates versus Anand Rathi Global Finance Limited

Ranjana Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited