Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Shreya Digital Color Lab

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/1161/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993. The bank proved loan availed by defendants and subsequent defaults. As defendants appeared ex parte, the Tribunal issued a Recovery Certificate for the due amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.42,09,347.25 plus interest @7.95% p.a. from filing till realization against defendants jointly and severally.

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Shreya Digital Color Lab — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^th Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA.No.1161/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Bank of Baroda Hebri Branch, Karkala Taluk, Udupi- 576112 Karnataka

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

M/s Shreya Digital Color Lab Represented by its proprietor, Vijaya Hegde, S/o. Sheena Hegde Shop NO.BF-01, 16, Door No.6-62-A-1, 6-62-A16, Ground Floor, Sphatika Plaza, Kuchoor Road, Hebri, Karkala Taluk, Udupi District- 576112

¶11

Also have address at: #2/49, Balebbi House, Seethanadi Post, Nadpal Village, Karkala Taluk, Hebri, Udupi District- 576112

¶12

Sheena Hegde, S/o. Deju Hegde R/at: #2/49, Balebbi House, Seethanadi Post, Nadpal Village, Karkala Taluk, Hebri, Udupi District- 576112

¶13

¶14

OA 1161-2023

¶15

Smt. Reshma Hegde W/o. Vijay Hegde R/at: #2/49, Balebbi House, Seethanadi Post, Nadpal Village, Karkala Taluk, Hebri, Udupi District- 576112

¶16

Mr. Nithin Poojary S/o. Muddu Poojary H.No.1-1, Mathrushreehouse, Chegribettu, Baidabettu Kudikokkarne, Udupi- 576234

¶17

...DEFENDANTS

¶18

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶19

Applicant : R & J Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

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 for Rs.42,09,347.25 (Rupees forty two lakh nine thousand three hundred forty seven and paisa twenty five only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶22

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a Proprietrix concern with other defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶23

I. Term Loan of a sum of Rs.26,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty six

OA 1161-2023

Lakh Only),

II. Overdraft loan limit of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs Only),

¶28

III. Covid Emergency Loan limit of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only),

¶29

IV. Term loan limit of Rs.4,95,000/- (Rupees four lakh ninety five thousand only) and

¶30

V. FITL loan limit of Rs.3,25,000/- (Rupees three lakh twenty five thousand only).

¶31

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above

¶32

amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with agreement of hypothecation, sanction letter, and memorandum of deposit in favor of the applicant bank.

¶33

It is further contended that, the defendants despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶34

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate

¶35

OA 1161-2023

¶36

¶37

for the amount due in the account.

¶38

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 03.12.2024.

¶39

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-3 to A-29 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶40

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶41

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶42

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶43

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶44

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶45

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶46

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

¶47

OA 1161-2023

¶48

¶49

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 mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶50

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

¶51

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶52

are availed by defendants for Term loan and FITL loan purpose,

¶53

this Tribunal in view of the rate of interest as claimed need not

¶54

be reduced. However, as the OA Claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate and also by applying default interest, the prayer for monthly rest and future penal interest are declined.

¶55

OA 1161-2023

¶56

¶57

In the result, OA.No.1161/2023, stands allowed,

¶58

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶59

sum of Rs.42,09,347.25 (Rupees forty two lakh nine thousand

¶60

three hundred forty seven and paisa twenty five only) with further interest @7.95% p.a. (Simple),

¶61

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly severally and 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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶62

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants

¶63

jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶64

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶65

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

¶66

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

¶67

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶68

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

¶69

OA 1161-2023

¶70

¶71

in terms of this final order.

¶72

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

¶73

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

¶74

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶75

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^th day of December, 2025].

¶76

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶77

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶78

ANNEXURES

¶79

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶80

AW-1: Pavan Kumar S Shet, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶81

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶82

The documents are appended in this matter.

¶83

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

¶84

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Shreya Digital Color Lab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Shreya Digital Color Lab

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri.Ramesh. B. Gowda

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ramraj Grewal

Canara Bank versus Mr. Bhanu Tiwari

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sri.Bheemaraya. N. Bhosale

Mrs Praveena Pattanashetti versus Union Bank of India

Mr Mohammad Ali Saifuddin Navalgund versus Idbi Bank