Bangalore District Court
Housing Developemnt Finance ... vs Arani Ugandhar on 17 January, 2026
KABC010195832022
IN THE COURT OF THE XI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CITY (CCH-8)
PRESENT
SRI. B.DASARATHA, B.A., LL.B.,
XI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
O.S. No.4684/2022
Plaintiff: Housing Development Finance
Corporation Bank Ltd.,
(Erstwhile HDFC LTD),
No.51, HDFC House, Kasturba Road,
Bangalore - 560 001,
Represented by its
Power of Attorney Holder/
Asst. Manager-Credit Risk
Management - Legal
Sri. Shridhar Chinni,
S/o. Late Chinni Venkataramana,
Aged about 30 years.
(By Adv. Sri. Shivashankar A.)
Vs.
Defendants: 1. Mr. Arani Ugandhar,
S/o. Late Arani Narayana Swami,
2 O.S. No.4684/2022
Aged about 40 years,
No.18, 1st Floor, 6th Cross,
Patalamma Layout, Kadugodi,
Bangalore - 560 067.
2. Mrs. A.Uma Sandhya,
W/o. Arani Ugandhar,
Aged about 33 years,
No.18, 1st Floor, 6th Cross,
Patalamma Layout, Kadugodi,
Bangalore - 560 067.
3. M/s. KSR Properties Pvt. Ltd. (Builder)
No.23, Sankey Square, Sankey Road,
Lower Palace Orchards, Sadashivanagar,
Bangalore - 560 003.
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory
Mr. Balakrishna Kante.
(D1 to D3 - Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit : 18.07.2022
Nature of the suit : Money Suit
Date of commencement of : 18.12.2025
Recording of the evidence
Date on which the Judgment : 17.01.2026
was pronounced
Total Duration : Years Months Days
03 05 29
XI ADDL., CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CITY.
3 O.S. No.4684/2022
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money arising out of loan transactions, enforcement of contractual and statutory liability and for consequential reliefs including enforcement of security by sale of the mortgaged property.
2. The brief averments of the plaint as follows: -
The plaintiff is a Housing Finance Institution, originally known as Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (HDFC Ltd.), which has been amalgamated with HDFC Bank Limited pursuant to the Order dated 17.03.2023 passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, with effect from 01.07.2023. By virtue of the said amalgamation, all assets, liabilities, rights and obligations of HDFC Ltd. have vested in the plaintiff bank, entitling it to prosecute the present suit.
2(a). The defendants No.1 and 2 approached the plaintiff for financial assistance for the purchase of a residential flat bearing No.I-101, situated at 1st Floor, I-Block, "KSR BASIL", at Huskur Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk. The defendant No.3 is the Builder and Developer of the said project. 4 O.S. No.4684/2022 Upon consideration of the request, the plaintiff sanctioned the following loan facilities:
(a) Housing Loan bearing Account No.644252750 for a sum of ₹17,00,000/-, out of which ₹9,00,412/- was disbursed for purchase of the said flat.
(b) Insurance Premium Funding Loan bearing Account No.644906358 for a sum of ₹61,728/- towards insurance premium of the mortgaged property.
2(b). The defendants No.1 and 2 executed loan applications, sanction letters, on-demand promissory notes, loan agreements and other necessary documents in favour of the plaintiff, agreeing to repay the loan amounts with interest at the agreed contractual rate. They also created an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds in respect of the schedule property by executing Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds. The defendant No.3, being the Builder/Vendor, received the disbursed loan amount directly from the plaintiff and executed Tripartite Agreement, acknowledging the loan transaction and the liability arising therefrom.
5 O.S. No.4684/2022
2(c). The defendants committed default in repayment of the Equated Monthly Installments (EMIs) despite repeated demands. The plaintiff issued a legal notice dated 27.01.2022, calling upon the defendants to clear the outstanding dues, but the same was not complied with. As on 13.01.2022, a total sum of ₹11,10,527/- was due and payable by the defendants. Hence, the present suit.
3. Summons were duly issued to the defendants. Despite service of summons, the defendants failed to appear before the Court. Accordingly, they were placed exparte.
4. The plaintiff examined its Authorized Officer as PW-1 and produced documentary evidence marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P17. There being no appearance on behalf of the defendants, there was no written statement, no evidence and no cross-examination.
5. Heard the arguments of plaintiff.
6. The points that arises for my consideration is as follows:-
1. Whether he plaintiff proves that defendants 6 O.S. No.4684/2022 No.1 and 2 availed housing loan and insurance premium funding loan and executed the relevant loan documents?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves default in repayment by the defendants?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit claim amount with interest?
4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to enforce the security and sell the schedule property?
5. What order or decree?
7. My findings on the above points are:-
Point No.1: In the affirmative.
Point No.2: In the affirmative.
Point No.3: In the affirmative.
Point No.4: In the affirmative.
Point No.5: As per final order below
for the following;
REASONS
8. Point No.1:- PW-1, the Senior Manager and Power of Attorney Holder of the plaintiff bank, reiterated the plaint averments on oath. The plaintiff produced documentary evidence 7 O.S. No.4684/2022 including:
Board Resolution and Letter of Authority Loan Applications and Sanction Letters On-Demand Promissory Notes Loan Agreements Agreement for Sale Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds Tripartite Agreement Statements of Account duly certified under the Bankers' Books Evidence Act Legal Notice and Postal Receipts
9. The oral testimony of PW-1 coupled with documentary evidence at Ex.P3 to Ex.P14 clearly establishes that defendants No.1 and 2 availed the housing loan and insurance premium funding loan and executed binding contractual documents in favour of the plaintiff. The evidence placed on record remains unchallenged and unrebutted. In the absence of any contest, the execution of documents stands proved. Hence, Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
8 O.S. No.4684/2022
10. Point No.2:- The statements of account marked at Ex.P10 and Ex.P15, duly certified under the provisions of the Bankers' Books Evidence Act, clearly disclose persistent default in repayment. Issuance of legal notice at Ex.P16 and its non- compliance further corroborate the default. Hence, Point No.2 is answered in the affirmative.
11. Point No.3: - As on 13.01.2022, the outstanding dues are as follows:
Loan Type Amount (₹)
Housing Loan 10,47,740=00
Insurance Premium Loan 62,787=00
11,10,527=00
Total
The rate of interest claimed is contractual, reasonable and agreed upon by the defendants. In the absence of any rebuttal, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the said amount with interest. Accordingly, Point No.3 is answered in the affirmative.
12. Point No.4:- The evidence on record establishes that defendants No.1 and 2 created an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds in respect of the schedule property. The defendant No.3, having received the loan amount and executed 9 O.S. No.4684/2022 the Tripartite Agreement, is jointly and severally liable. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to enforce the security and sell the schedule property in accordance with law. Hence, Point No.4 is answered in the affirmative.
13. Point No.5:- In view of the findings on the above points, the suit deserves to be decreed. Hence, this court proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed with costs.
The defendants are jointly and severally directed to pay the plaintiff a sum of ₹11,10,527/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Ten Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Seven Only).
The defendants shall further pay interest at the rate of 14.03% per annum from 14.01.2022 till realization.
The plaintiff is entitled to enforce the security by sale of the schedule property and adjust the sale 10 O.S. No.4684/2022 proceeds towards the decretal amount.
In the event of any shortfall after such sale, the plaintiff is at liberty to recover the balance amount personally from the defendants and their other assets in accordance with law.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me, in the open court, this the 17th day of January, 2026) (B.DASARATHA) XI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU CITY.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for plaintiff:-
PW.1 : Sri. Shridhar Chinni List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:-
Ex.P1 : Certified copy of Board Resolution Ex.P2 : Certified copy of Letter of Authority Ex.P3 : Loan Application Ex.P4 : Sanctioned Letter dated 28.08.2019 Ex.P5 : On-Demand Promissory Note dated 16.09.2019 Ex.P6 : Home Loan Agreement dated 16.09.2019 11 O.S. No.4684/2022 Ex.P7 : Agreement for Sale dated 22.11.2018 Ex.P8 : Memorandum of Deposit Ex.P9 : Tripartite Agreement dated 06.09.2019 Ex.P10 : Account Extract along with Certificate Ex.P11 : Acceptance Copy.
Ex.P12 : On-Demand Promissory Note dated 16.09.2019 Ex.P13 : Loan Agreement dated 16.09.2019 Ex.P14 : Memorandum of Deposit dated 16.09.2019 Ex.P15 : Statement of Account along with Certificate Ex.P16 : Office copy of Legal Notice dated 27.01.2022 Ex.P17 : 3 Postal Receipts List of witnesses examined and documents exhibited for defendants:
- Nil -
XI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY.
Digitally signed by DASARATHA
DASARATHA BETTAPPA
BETTAPPA Date:
2026.01.17
17:28:23 +0530