Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri. Basanagouda Kambli

DRT5 Apr 2024OA/185/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India against a borrower for recovery of agricultural loan dues. The claim was considered on an ex-parte basis as the defendant failed to file a written statement.

What did the court decide?

The bank is allowed to recover Rs. 24,26,727 with future interest at 11% per annum compounded half-yearly from 04.08.2021, or by sale of mortgaged assets.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Basanagouda Kambli — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 5^th Day of April, 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA Hon’ble Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.185/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India Asset Recovery Branch at Mysore Bank Building, BKG Complex, A- Block, 2nd Floor, Avenue Road, Bengaluru- 560009 Represented by it’s Chief Manager, Sri. Vinaya Bhat

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:.

¶9

Sri.Basanagouda Kambli S/o. Sri. Gaddeppa Kambli Aged about 41 years R/o Chikka-Upperi Village Lingasugur Taluq, Raichur District-584 122

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Sri. G.N. Satyamurthy Defendant : Sri. Devaraja. E.

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 31.01.2022 under section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Intuitions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.24,26,727/- (Rupees ( Rupees Twenty Four Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Seven Only) only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶15

¶16

OA. No. 185/2022

¶17

The application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 Recovery of the Debts Due to Banks and Financial Intuitions Act 1993 and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶18

Brief facts of the case:

¶19

It is the case of the applicant bank where in the Defendant as borrower had approached the applicant bank seeking for Agricultural Term Loan of Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees one lakh seventy thousand Only) and KCC of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty lakh only). Accordingly, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the Agricultural Term Loan of Rs.1,70,000/- (Rupees one lakh seventy thousand Only) and KCC of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty lakh only). The rate of interest agreed to under the Deed was at 11 % p.a. with half yearly interest and costs. It was agreed that the Bank would be entitled to change the rate of Interest from time to time on account of the changes in SBAR/ SBPTLR.

¶20

Further, the Defendants had approached the applicant bank seeking for additional Agricultural Term Loan Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand Only) cash credit along with renewal of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty lakh only) term loan and total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only). Accordingly, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the additional Agricultural Term Loan Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand Only) cash credit along with renewal of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty lakh only) term

¶21

¶22

OA. No. 185/2022

¶23

loan. The rate of interest agreed to under the Deed was at 11 % p.a. with half yearly interest and costs. It was agreed that the Bank would be entitled to change the rate of Interest from time to time on account of the changes in SBAR/ SBPTLR.

¶24

Further, the Defendants had approached the applicant bank seeking for the Agricultural Term Loan Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh Only) an loan application dated 24.12.2008 purpose of purchase of Tractor. Accordingly, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the additional Agricultural Term Loan Agricultural Term Loan Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh Only) on 24.12.2008. The ATL was agreed to be repaid in 18 half yearly instalment of Rs.46,000/- w.e.f. December 2009 along with interest @ 11% p.a. with half yearly rests.

¶25

The defendants executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loans, interest, cost and charges, and Defendant executed Registered Mortgage Deed dated 22.10.2008, Which was duly registered as LNG-1-03935/2008-09 and recorded in CD No. LNGD 32 dated 23.10.2008 at the office of the SubRegistrar Lingasugar and Agreement of Hypothecation dated 24.12.2008 & 03.02.2011 and Deed of further Registered Mortgage dated 16.12.2008 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶26

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendant, after availing the said facilities, failed to repay the loan amount and committed default. The Applicant Bank issue a Legal Notice dated 03.01.2022 calling upon the

¶27

¶28

OA. No. 185/2022

¶29

defendants to repay the entire outstanding loan amount. However, there was no positive response from the Defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the Defendant.

¶30

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendant Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due the same is duly served and Defendant entered appearance through counsel Sri. Devaraja E by filling Vakalath, but did not file the written statement in spite of opportunity, hence Written Statement of Defendant was closed on 16.01.2023 When OA was taken up on 16.01.2023 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the Defendant.

¶31

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶32

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sri. Chidambar Majali S/o

¶33

Kashinath Majali, Chief Manager, has filed Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, the list of Document came to be marked as Ex.A2 and documents came to be

¶34

marked as Ex.A3 to A17. As the Defendant remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶35

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a

¶36

¶37

OA. No. 185/2022

¶38

final order on the following terms:

¶39

: O R D E R:

¶40

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶41

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendant to pay an amount of Rs.24,26,727/- (Rupees ( Rupees Twenty Four Lakh Twenty Six Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Seven Only) with future interest at the rate of 11% per annum compounded with half yearly rest from 04.08.2021 till the realization of the amount due.

¶42

(b) In the event of failure of the Defendant to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned property in the OA;

¶43

¶44

(d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movable and immovable) respectively to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶45

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA

¶46

amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly

¶47

¶48

OA. No. 185/2022

¶49

considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendant and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing

¶50

of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the

¶51

amount to be paid by the respective defendants to the applicant bank.

¶52

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the

¶53

date of this final order.

¶54

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery

¶55

Officer in terms of the final order.

¶56

(h) Interim Application pending if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶57

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶58

[Dictated to the (CS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on this the 5^th Day of April 2024].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1: Sri. Chidambar Majali S/o Kashinath Majali, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents	Date
Nos.
A1	Applicant Evidence
A2	List of Documents.
A3	Registered Mortgage Deed	14.08.2006
A4	Affidavit	22.08.2006
A5	Registered Mortgage Deed	22.10.2008

¶66

¶67

OA. No. 185/2022

¶68

A6	Application for loan	24.12.2008
A7	Sanction Letter	24.12.2008
A8	Hypothecation Agreement	24.12.2008
A9	Deed of Further Mortgage	16.12.2008
A10	Encumbrance Certificate	20.12.2008
A11	Application for Renewal	24.01.2011
A12	Sanction Letter	03.02.2011
A13	Hypothecation Agreement	03.02.2011
A14	Certified Accounts Extract	03.08.2021
A15	Certified Accounts Extract	03.08.2021
A16	Certified Accounts Extract	03.08.2021
A17	Certified Accounts Extract	03.08.2021
Witne	ss Examined for the Defendant:	-Nil -
List of	Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:	-Nil -

¶69

SCHEDULE- I

¶70

The crops grown in the lands more fully described in Schedule II hereunder as also all the moveable Assets of the Defendant including the Tools, Equipments, Fixtures and all other Machineries, Receivables and Investments, other movable assets and valuables, including the Assets generated out of the Bank Finance.

¶71

SCHEDULE II

¶72

The Agricultural Lands of the Defendant bearing: Sy.No. 12/1 measuring 19 Acres 02 Guntas Bounded by:

¶73

East: Halla (NALA)

¶74

West: Land of Amarappa North: Nala

¶75

South: Land of Sharanappa

¶76

Land is situated at Sunakal Village, Taluq-Lingasugur, District –Raichur

¶77

Sd/-

¶78

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

OA. No. 185/2022

OA. No. 185/2022

State Bank of India v. Sri. Basanagouda Kambli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri. Basanagouda Kambli

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 M/S Vishal Udyog ,through Its Proprietor Shri Vishal Vasant Wahurwagh

State Bank of India versus Anishbhai

Chandra Bhushan Singh versus Icici Bank Limited

Canara Bank versus M/S Kanha Polymers

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Logisticswaala Express Services

Ma Sarada Residency Pvt.Ltd versus Indian Bank