Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Chowdamma alias Narayanamma

DRT12 Nov 2025OA/136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a Recovery Certificate under the RDB Act for agricultural loans defaulting as NPA, granting recovery of principal and reduced interest at 6% p.a. against defendants and properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.31,81,481.52 plus 6% p.a. simple interest from filing date against defendants jointly and severally and against schedule property.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Chowdamma alias Narayanamma — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 12^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.136/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank Branch office at: Mandikal B Branch-732, Muibagal Taluk, Kolar District-562104

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Chowdamma Alias Narayanamma W/o. Muneppa

¶9

Sri. Muneppa S/o Venkataramaiah

¶10

Sri. Somashankar S/o. Muneppa

¶11

Sri. Manjuntha S/o. Muneppa

¶12

Sri. Hanumesha S/o. Muneppa

¶13

Sri. Vikram S/o. Muneppa

¶14

Sri. Somappa S/o. Byrappa

¶15

All are R/at: Chikkanahalli Village, Mulbagal Taluk,

¶16

Kolar District- 563131 ...DEFENDANTS

¶17

OA 136/2024

¶18

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶20

Applicant : Nandish N J Defendants : Exparte

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶23

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.31,81,481.52 (Rupees thirty one lakh eighty one thousand four hundred eighty one and paisa fifty two only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶24

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants No.1 to 7 as the borrowers/co-obligants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶25

I. Crop Loan of a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- (Rupees two lakh ninety thousand Only),

¶26

II. Kisan OD loan limit of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakh Only), and

¶27

III. Crop Credit Loan limit of Rs.1,45,000/- (Rupees one lakh forty five Only).

¶28

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

¶29

OA 136/2024

¶30

¶31

amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with simple mortgage deed, memorandum of agreement, simple mortgage deed and letters of revival in favor of the applicant bank.

¶32

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.

¶33

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.

¶34

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 28.08.2024.

¶35

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-49 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶36

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered

¶37

OA 136/2024

¶38

¶39

the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶40

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶41

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

¶42

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶43

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶44

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 hypothecation and mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and

¶45

the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶46

OA 136/2024

¶47

¶48

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶49

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶50

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 agricultural purpose and also that

¶53

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 @6% p.a.(Simple).

¶54

In the result, OA.No.136/2024, stands allowed,

¶55

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.31,81,481.52 (Rupees thirty one lakh eighty one thousand four hundred eighty one and paisa fifty two only) with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple),

¶56

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶57

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

¶58

the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶59

OA 136/2024

¶60

¶61

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

¶62

are jointly severally and personally and their other assets are

¶63

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

¶66

receipt of the order.

¶67

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

¶68

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶69

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

¶70

in terms of this final order.

¶71

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

¶72

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

¶73

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶74

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 12^th day of November, 2025].

¶75

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 136/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶80

AW-1: Udumula Krishna Reddy, Branch 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

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Chowdamma alias Narayanamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Chowdamma alias Narayanamma

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Kala Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Malkeet Singh @Malkit Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Hopstop Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S Ambey India

State Bank of India versus Saravanan Mani

Canara Bank versus Mahantesh Arjun