Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mirza Ibne Ali

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/98/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Union Bank of India for issuance of a Recovery Certificate of Rs 29.61 million against a defaulting borrower. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal reduced the interest rate to 8% simple per annum and directed recovery from the defendant's person and schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs 29,61,131.51 with 8% simple interest from filing to realization, recoverable from defendant and schedule properties.

Union Bank of India versus Mirza Ibne Ali — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.98/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Union Bank of India Mysore Main Branch, 47D/47E, Ashoka Road, Mannar’s Complex, Mysore Mysore dist. Karnataka – 570 001 Through Its Senior Manager Mr. Ranjan M S …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

Sri. Mirza Ibne Ali S/o. Mirza Feroze Ali R/at; #3, SBM Colony, Tent Road, Udayagiri, Mysore – 570 019 ...DEFENDANT

¶8

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶9

Applicant : VS Associates Defendant : Ex parte

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs 29,61,131.51/- (Rupees Twenty-Nine Lakhs Sixty-One Thousand One Hundred and Thirty-One and Paisa Fifty-One Only) with further

¶12

OA-98/2022

¶13

¶14

interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶15

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed a housing loan of Rs. 28,75,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lakhs Seventy-Five Thousand only).

¶16

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents. 4. It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

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-9 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶20

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.

¶21

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶22

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶23

OA-98/2022

¶24

¶25

claim as against the defendant?

¶26

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶27

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶28

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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, and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶29

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

¶30

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is availed for Housing purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is of the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶31

In the result, OA.No.98/2022, stands allowed,

¶32

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶33

OA-98/2022

¶34

¶35

Rs. 29,61,131.51/- (Rupees Twenty-Nine Lakhs Sixty-One Thousand One Hundred and Thirty-One and Paisa Fifty-One Only) with further interest @8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant 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.

¶36

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶37

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.

¶38

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

¶39

v) Interim application pending, if any, are disposed of with this Final Order.

¶40

OA-98/2022

¶41

¶42

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶43

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

¶44

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶45

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30^th Day of June, 2026].

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶49

AW-1: Prashob P, S/o. Padmanabha N Nair, Chief Manager, of

¶50

Applicant Bank.

¶51

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶52

Exhibits	Description of loan documents
A-1	Application dated 05.08.2017
A-2	Sanction letter dated 08.08.2017
A-3	Demand promissory note executed by the defendant in favour of applicant dated 08.08.2017
A-4	Home loan agreement executed in favour of the applicant executed by the defendant dated 08.08.2017
A-5	Interest rate agreement (MCLR) executed by the defendant in favour of the applicant dated 08.08.2017
A-6	Letter of continuity executed by the defendant in favour of applicant dated 08.08.2017
A-7	General agreement executed by the defendant in favour of applicant dated 08.08.2017
A-8	SARFAESI notice dated 10.10.2019
A-9	True Extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant’s loan accounts-331406650000303
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶53

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶54

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Mirza Ibne Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mirza Ibne Ali

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Anugya Enterprises

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/s Maa Sharde Agritech

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Balajee Coal Depot

Manoj Kumar Sharma versus Punjab National Bank

Sri Ram Bhagat Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Niraj Marble and Tiles and Ors.