Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Hi Tech Multilaterals India Pvt. Ltd.

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/98/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Recovery Certificate application for Rs. 1.66 Cr + interest at 12% p.a. against joint and several liability of borrowers and guarantors, who did not appear, based on uncontroverted documentary evidence of loan default.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 1,66,85,024 with 12% simple interest from filing date till realization from defendants jointly and severally.

Union Bank of India versus Hi Tech Multilaterals… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.98/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Union Bank of India (earlier Andhra Bank) Jayanagar 4^th Block Branch, No.487, 32^nd ‘E’ Cross, 19^th main, 4^th ‘T’ Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru-560041 Rep. by its Principal Officer and Branch Manager

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Hi-Tech Multilaterals India Pvt. Ltd., Directors: Shailesh Pooncha and Sujaya Anil Regd. Office: No.1035, 4^th ‘M’ Block, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560010

¶11

Shailesh Pooncha S/o. Mohan Pooncha Aged about 46 years Flat No.2, No.88, Kathimaramma Nilaya, 1^st Cross, Behind Prestige Motors, Kethamaranahalli, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560010

¶12

Sujaya Anil W/o. Late K M Anil Aged about 58 years No.2031, HIG 3^rd Phase,

¶13

OA. No.98/2023

¶14

¶15

4^th ‘B’ Cross, Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru-560064

¶16

Shiva Charan S/o. Girirajan Aged about 51 years No.111, 1^st Main, 4^th Cross, Mathru layout, Near Mother Dairy, Yelahanka, Bengaluru-560064

¶17

...DEFENDANTS

¶18

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Sri. M.R. Rajini Defendants : Exparte

¶19

:FINAL ORDER:

¶20

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.1,66,85,024/- (Rupees One Crore Sixty Six Lakh Eighty Five Thousand and Twenty Four only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed Overdraft facility of Rs.1,80,00,000/- on 27.07.2018; UGECL Term loan of Rs.36,00,000/-.

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents.

¶23

OA. No.98/2023

¶24

¶25

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 account as NPA.

¶26

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.

¶27

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 08.05.2025.

¶28

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A24 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

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

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

OA. No.98/2023

¶34

¶35

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶36

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. 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, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶37

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities were availed for business purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00% p.a.(simple).

¶39

OA. No.98/2023

¶40

¶41

In the result, OA.No.98/2023 stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶43

of Rs.1,66,85,024/- (Rupees One Crore Sixty Six Lakh Eighty Five

¶44

Thousand and Twenty Four only) with further interest of 12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from

¶45

defendants, 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 defendants jointly, severally

¶46

and personally and also by proceeding against their assets including the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for

¶49

all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶50

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

OA. No.98/2023

¶54

¶55

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶57

with this Final Order.

¶58

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

¶59

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

¶60

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶61

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

¶62

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

ANNEXURES

¶64

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Sri. Srinivas Reddy Estramuli, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶67

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1	Loan application dated 21.07.2018	A1
2	Letter of sanction dated 27.07.2018	A2
3	Composite agreement dated 27.07.2018	A3
4	General form of Guarantee dated 27.07.2018	A4
5	General form of Guarantee dated 27.07.2018	A5

¶68

OA. No.98/2023

¶69

6	Sanction letter dated 20.08.2020	A6
7	Demand promissory note dated 20.08.2020	A7
8	Letter to obtained dated 20.08.2020	A8
9	Simple agreement dated 20.08.2020	A9
10	General term loan agreement dated 10.08.2020	A10
11	Letter of continuity	A11
12	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 31.07.2018	A12
13	Extension of EM/Memorandum of Entry	A13
14	Encumbrance certificate for the period 01.04.2018 to 01.08.2018	A14
15	Encumbrance certificate for the period 14.10.2020 to 14.10.2020	A15
16	Gift deed dated 01.06.2018	A16
17	Legal notice dated 12.9.2022	A17
18	Postal receipt	A18
19	Postal acknowledgment	A19
20	Return postal cover	A20
21	Postal acknowledgment	A21
22	Postal acknowledgment	A22
23	Statement of account showing the balance outstanding int eh loan A/c.No. 169631100000362	A23
24	Statement of account showing the balance outstanding in the outstanding in the loan A/c.No. 169631100007046	A24

Union Bank of India v. Hi Tech Multilaterals India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Hi Tech Multilaterals India Pvt. Ltd.

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.