Allowed

State Bank of India v. Raghavendra

DRT26 Sept 2025OA/101/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for a Recovery Certificate against the defaulting borrower for an NP account. The claim included principal and interest, which were reduced to 8% simple interest considering the housing purpose.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate to be drawn for Rs. 46,18,029.93 plus interest @8.00% p.a. simple from date of filing till realization.

State Bank of India versus Raghavendra — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 26^th Day of September, 2025

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶5

Presiding Officer

¶6

OA.No.101/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

State Bank of India, Represented by its Chief Manager, Mrs. Jayanthi.A, Office at, #11/90, 3^rd Floor, Near Old Shivaji Theatre, JC Road, Bangalore- 560002

¶9

…APPLICANT

¶10

AND:

¶11

Mr. Raghavendra R, S/o Sri. Ravi, Aged 40 years, 1320, Ground Floor, 11^th Cross, 7^th Main, Nagapura, Mahalaxmipuram, Bangalore- 560 096.

¶12

Also having address at: 1. Mr. Raghavendra R, Flat No-0 A, Ground Floor, GEO Residency, 4^th Cross, Hanumantharayappa Layout, Byrathi Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Kothanur, Bangalore- 560 077. 2. IBM India Pvt Ltd, No. 12, Subramanya Arcade, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore- 560 029.

...DEFENDANT

OA 101/2022

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : R & J Associates Defendant : Exparte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs. 46,18,029.93 (Rupees Forty Six Lakh Eighteen Thousand Twenty Nine and Paise Ninety Three Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Only) for the purpose of purchase of flat.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents along with memorandum for recording creation of mortgage by depositing title deeds. 4. It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal

¶23

by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount

OA 101/2022

due in the account.

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 07.02.2025.

¶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 A-1 to A-10 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

¶32

as against the defendant?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the

¶36

OA 101/2022

¶37

¶38

defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above

¶39

documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶41

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶43

availed for Housing purpose and also that the 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 8.00% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.101/2022, stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶46

46,18,029.93 (Rupees Forty Six Lakh Eighteen Thousand Twenty Nine and Paise Ninety Three Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple)

¶47

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 Schedule ‘B’ & ‘C’ of schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶48

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

¶49

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally

¶50

OA 101/2022

¶51

¶52

and his assets are liable for respective amounts due under the loan

¶53

account.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

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

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶60

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

¶61

Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 26^th Day of September, 2025].

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

(T. RAJESH)

¶65

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶66

ANNEXURES

¶67

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶68

AW-1: Mr. Mahesh Kumar C S/o Nathamal Chotia, Chief Manager, of

¶69

Applicant Bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	18.06.2016	The home loan application

¶72

OA 101/2022

¶73

¶74

A2	18.06.2016	Letter of arrangement
A3	18.06.2016	Memorandum of agreement for home loan granted to public
A4	18.06.2016	Affidavit for non availment of other loans
A5	18.06.2016	The agreement to mortgage
A6	20.06.2016	The memorandum relating to deposit of title deeds
A7 Series	25.09.2017 14.08.2018 19.12.2019 And 02.02.2021	The demand notice, possession notice and the statutory notice
A8	22.12.2021	Legal notice, postal receipts and acknowledgment card
A9	--	Statement of Acc. No. 65259075536
A10	--	Banker’s certificate

¶75

Witness Examined for the Defendant: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Raghavendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Raghavendra

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 (Syndicate Bank) versus Nagamma

Bank of Baroda versus Smt Vidyashri Srivasthav

Union Bank of India versus Ms Parexcell Softsource Pvt. Ltd.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Vijaya Sekhar Kasala

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Boralinge Gowda Dead by Lrs Smt Sharadamma

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Rajendra Blakrishna Dalal