Allowed

State Bank of India v. Vishnu Prasad Boini

DRT29 Sept 2025OA/1044/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for a Recovery Certificate. The defendant was set aside ex parte. The Tribunal reduced the interest rate and directed recovery against the defendant personally and her assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.1,56,69,626/- plus interest at 8% p.a. (simple) from filing date. Recovery directed against defendant personally and assets including schedule property. Interim inju

State Bank of India versus Vishnu Prasad Boini — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.1044/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, 1/90, 3^rd Floor, Near Old Shivaji Theater, Opp: Trustwell Hospital, J.C. Road, Bangalore-560002, Represented by its chief Manager, Sri. Nagendra N … APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Mr. Vishnu Prasad Boini S/o. Komuraiah Boini Aged about 27 years, Residing at: No.3-50, Burgupalle, Boinpally, Rajanna Sircilla Telangana-505302

¶9

...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Sri. Vijay S Defendant : Exparte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

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 defendant

¶14

OA. No.1044/2024

¶15

¶16

for Rs.1,56,69,626/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Six Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Six only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the borrower availed the housing loan of Rs.1,51,05,000/- for the purpose of construction of new house on 24.01.2023.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendant executed necessary loan documents apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶19

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 account as NPA.

¶20

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.

¶21

OA. No.1044/2024

¶22

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 14.02.2025.

¶24

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A8 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendant? ii) What order are to be passed?

¶28

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶29

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶30

remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶31

undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility

¶32

OA. No.1044/2024

¶33

¶34

as stated in the OA, as to the execution of loan documents as

¶35

claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the

¶36

accounts. The liability of the defendant 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 finding which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶39

was availed for housing 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 8.00% (simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.1044/2024 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶42

sum of Rs.1,56,69,626/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Six Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Six only) with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from defendant, after giving credit to all the amount

¶43

OA. No.1044/2024

¶44

¶45

recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendant personally and the assets of the defendant, including the schedule property are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts. The schedule to the OA be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate.

¶46

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

¶47

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and her other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶48

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

iv) The Interim Order of Injunction passed in

¶53

IA.No.219/2024 in OA.No.1044/2024 is made, absolute.

¶54

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

¶55

OA. No.1044/2024

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶59

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th Day of September 2025].

¶60

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1: Mr. Nagaraja V, chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Annexure	Date	Particulars
A1	24.01.2023	Arrangement Letter Issued By The Applicant Bank
A2	24.01.2023	Memorandum of loan agreement for Home loan granted to public
A3	24.01.2023	Agreement to mortgage executed by the defendant.
	30.01.2023	Equitable mortgage by Deposit of Title
A4		Deeds executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A5	24.01.2023	Deed of Undertaking executed by
		defendant in favour of the applicant

¶66

OA. No.1044/2024

¶67

		bank.
A6	24.01.2023	Indemnity Bond executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank.
A7	11.01.2024	Legal notice issued by the applicant bank to the defendant.
A8	--	Statement of account

¶68

(T. RAJESH)

¶69

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Vishnu Prasad Boini

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Vishnu Prasad Boini

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 Raghavendra

Indian Bank versus Gowramma

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Mallikarjuna

Hdfc Bank versus Ram Lubhaya

Punjab National Bank versus Balwinder Singh

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sri Basavaraj