Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Smt S Sujatha

DRT24 Oct 2025OA/1095/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Bank of India under section 19 of the RDB Act seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate. Defendants appeared ex parte. The Tribunal reduced the interest rate to 8% per annum and directed recovery of the outstanding principal with reduced interest.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.3,06,82,720.53 with interest at 8.00% p.a. (simple) from date of filing till realization.

Bank of Baroda versus Smt S Sujatha — 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.1095/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Bank of India Zonal Stressed Asset Recovery Branch, 41/2, M G Road, Vijaya Towers (7^th Floor) Bengaluru – 560001, Through its authorized signatory And Asst. General Manager, Sri. V.M.S. Raja … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. S Sujatha W/o. S. Harsha Aged about 49 years No.179/8, 15^th Main road, 36^th Cross, Jayanagar 9^th block, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560041

¶10

S. Sri Harsha S/o. Venkataswamy Aged about 55 years No.179/8, 15^th main road, 36^th Cross, Jayanagar 9^th block, Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560041 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M/s. V S Associates Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.1095/2023

FINAL ORDER

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 defendants for Rs.3,06,82,720.53 (Rupees Three Crore Six Lakh Eighty Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty and Fifty Three Paise only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed home loan of Rs.2,00,00,000/- on 21.04.2016.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants 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 defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶20

OA. No.1095/2023

¶21

¶22

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.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 21.01.2025.

¶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 A6 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 defendants? 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 defendants remained exparte. The

¶31

OA. No.1095/2023

¶32

¶33

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 facility as stated in the OA, as to the execution of loan documents as claimed by the applicant bank 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.

¶34

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.

¶35

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility 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).

¶36

In the result, OA.No.1095/2023 stands allowed,

¶37

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶38

of Rs.3,06,82,720.53 (Rupees Three Crore Six Lakh Eighty Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty and Fifty Three Paise only)

¶39

OA. No.1095/2023

¶40

¶41

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 recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendants jointly, severally and personally and the assets of the defendants, 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.

¶42

^{iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding}

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶46

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶47

with this Final Order.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶49

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of October 2025].

¶50

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/-

OA. No.1095/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶56

AW-1: Mr. Durgesh Chandra Roy, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶57

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶58

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Loan agreement dated 20.04.2016 and sanction letter dated 21.04.2016
A2	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 21.04.2016
A3	Demand promissory note dated 21.04.2016
A4	Articles of agreement dated 21.04.2016
A5	Demand notice under S.13(2) dated 20.04.2021
A6	Account statements pertaining to loan account No.73940600000467

¶59

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

Sd/-

Bank of Baroda v. Smt S Sujatha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Smt S Sujatha

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