Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. Shashikala

DRT24 Oct 2025OA/1059/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's OA for recovery of dues accorded to housing loan defaults despite respondent absence, ordering reduced 8% interest and permission to proceed against secured schedule property.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for principal of Rs. 73,96,695 plus 8% simple interest from OA filing date, enforceable against schedule property and personal assets.

City Union Bank Limited versus Shashikala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA.No.1059/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

City Union Bank Ltd, Having a branch among other place At HSR Layout,1672/A, HSR Optima, 14^th Main Road, Gound Floor, Sector VII, Near BDA Complex, HSR Layout, Bangalore 560102, Represented by its Branch manager, Mr. R. Kaliprasanna, Son of A Ramamurthy, Aged about 39 years.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mrs. Shashikala, W/o Chandrashekar,

¶11

Mr. Chandrashekar, S/o Govindaiah,

¶12

Both of them are residing at, Residing at No 141/a, 5^th Cross, 1^st Bloack, 19^th Main, Rajaji Nagar, Near Indian Bank, Mahalakshmi Layout, Bangalore- 560010.

¶13

...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : H.R. Sunil Kumar Defendants : Exparte

OA 1059/2022

FINAL ORDER

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 defendants for Rs. 73,96,695/- (Rupees Seventy Three Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Five Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed Housing loan facility of Rs. 80,00,000/- (Rupees Eighty lakh Only).

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with demand promissory note and memorandum of deposit of title deeds.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities,

¶23

agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶24

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.

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 14.08.2024.

¶26

OA 1059/2022

¶27

¶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-7 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

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

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 the security

¶35

interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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.

¶36

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

¶37

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of

¶38

OA 1059/2022

¶39

¶40

the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶42

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).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.1059/2022, stands allowed,

¶44

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

¶45

73,96,695/- (Rupees Seventy Three Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Six

¶46

Hundred Ninety Five Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & 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 property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally & personally and their assets are liable for respective amounts due under the respective loan accounts.

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

OA 1059/2022

¶52

¶53

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

¶54

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms

¶56

of this final order.

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

Rules, 1993.

¶60

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the

¶61

Open Court, this the 24^th Day of October, 2025].

¶62

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶63

PRESIDING OFFICER ANNEXURES

¶64

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Mohan Babu S/o Tamilalaghan, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶67

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	11.03.2019	Demand promissory note
A2	11.03.2019	Application cum undertaking for loan
A3	11.03.2019	Sanction letter
A4	25.03.2019	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds
A5 & A6	15.03.2022	Re-call notice two in nos
A7	--	Certified copy of statement of account
Witness Exa	mined for th	e Defendants: -Nil -
List of Docu	ments Exhibi	ted for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶68

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

City Union Bank Limited v. Shashikala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. Shashikala

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

Punjab National Bank versus Raghbir Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Guzar Ahmad Wani

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Prasanta Ghosh

Ms North Malda Rice Mill and Anr. versus West Bengal Gramin Bank

Canara Bank versus Sannasiddappa Hanumappa Vaddar

Canara Bank versus Mayamma