Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Smt Parwathamma

DRT25 Sept 2025OA/1375/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Karnataka Grameena Bank for a recovery certificate regarding defaulted agricultural and KCC loans. The court found evidence uncontroverted, denied the prayer for penal interest, and ordered defendants to repay the principal amount with 6% simple interest pending realization.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued directing respondents to pay Rs. 54,67,029.77 (aggregate sum) with interest at 6% p.a. simple; defendant liable to the extent of estate inherited.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Smt Parwathamma — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1375/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank, (erstwhile Karnataka Gramin Bank), Alhalli Branch, Alhalli, Chittapura Taluk, Gulbarga District -585401. Rep. by its Branch Manager,

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Parwathamma, W/o. Mallanna Wad, R/at Ramtirtha Village, Chittapura Taluk, Gulbarga District -585211.

¶9

Sri. Mallanna, S/o. Duragappa Wad, R/at Ramtirtha Village, Chittapura Taluk, Gulbarga District -585211.

¶10

Sri. Ayyanna Gowda, S/o. Doddanegowda Patil, R/at Ramtirtha Village, Chittapura Taluk, Gulbarga District -585211.

...DEFENDANTS

OA 1375/2023

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : B. Prasanna Kumar Defendant No. 1 & 3 : Exparte Defendant No. 2 : R. S. B. G. Law Firm (WS Closed)

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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. 54,67,029.77 (Rupees fifty-four lakh sixty-seven thousand twenty-nine and paisa seventy-seven only) with further interest thereon and cost from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the Applicant (erstwhile Karnataka Gramin Bank, which was subsequently amalgamated with the present Applicant) that Defendants No. 1 and 2, as the borrowers, and Defendant No. 3, as the guarantor, availed an Agricultural Loan facility of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees six lakh only). Additionally, Defendant No. 1, as the borrower, and Defendant No. 2, as coborrower/guarantor, availed a KCC Loan of Rs. 2,50,000/(Rupees two lakh fifty thousand only). The Defendants executed the necessary loan documents and created a mortgage and hypothecation over the scheduled properties.

¶19

OA 1375/2023

¶20

¶21

It is the case of the Applicant that the Defendants, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing with the Terms and Conditions for the loans, failed in complying with the same, resulting in defaults and consequentially turning the loan accounts as Non-Performing Asset (NPA).

¶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

summons was taken out to the defendants. Defendant No.

¶24

2 filed vakalat through his advocate but failed to file written statement on time, hence the chance for filing written statement of Defendant No. 2 was closed on 09.12.2022, and subsequently they were called absent and set exparte on 30.01.2025.

¶25

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-25, got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

OA 1375/2023

¶28

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

i) Whether the Applicant succeeded in proving the OA

¶31

claim as against the Defendants?

¶32

ii) If so, to what extent?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The evidence tendered by the Applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidence put forth by the Applicant is found admissible and sufficient to prove the averments made in the OA, and the default committed by the Defendants in repaying the loan amount due. The liability of the Defendants and the loan amount due are also proved by the above documents.

¶35

Hence in view of the above findings this Tribunal comes

¶36

to the conclusion that the OA is liable to be allowed.

¶37

The Original Application (OA) has been filed within the

¶38

period of limitation. There is no capitalization of penal interest.

¶39

Since the credit facility is availed for agricultural purpose,

¶40

Pendente lite and future interest are awarded at 6.00% per

¶41

OA 1375/2023

¶42

¶43

annum (simple interest). The prayer for interest with monthly

¶44

rests and for penal interest for the future period is hereby declined.

¶45

In the result, OA.No.1375/2023, is allowed,

¶46

i) The Applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum

¶47

of Rs. 54,67,029.77 (Rupees fifty-four lakh sixty-seven

¶48

thousand twenty-nine and paisa seventy-seven only) consisting of:

¶49

a) Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 ae liable to pay a sum of Rs.

¶50

47,68,681.62 (Rupees forty-seven lakh sixty-eight thousand six hundred eighty-one and paisa sixty-two only) with pendente lite and future interest of 6.00% p.a. (simple) and;

¶51

b) Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 liable to pay a sum of Rs.6,98,348.15 (Rupees six lakh ninety-eight thousand three

¶52

hundred forty-eight and Paisa fifteen only) with pendente lite and future interest of 6.00% p.a. (simple)

¶53

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

¶54

Defendants jointly, severally and personally after giving credit to

¶55

all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of

¶56

OA 1375/2023

¶57

¶58

the OA if any, and allow the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendants jointly, severally, personally and also by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate.

¶59

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

¶60

loan amount due from defendants personally, jointly and severally, then the Applicant bank is at liberty to procced against their other assets for the recovery of the amounts.

¶61

iii) Defendants are only liable to the extent of the estate inherited from the deceased borrowers.

¶62

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶63

for which Applicant to file cost memo within seven days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶64

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

¶65

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶66

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

¶67

in terms of this final order.

¶68

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶69

OA 1375/2023

¶70

¶71

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶72

(Dictated to PY directly on the Computer, after its transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 25^th day of September, 2025)

¶73

Sd/(T. RAJESH)

¶74

PRESIDING OFFICER ANNEXURES

¶75

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶76

AW-1: Sri. Sanjeev Kumar, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶77

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶78

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	28.09.2006	Copy of Loan Application
A2	28.09.2006	Copy of Sanction letter
A3	19.12.2006	Copy of loan agreement
A4	19.12.2006	Copy of Guarantor agreement
A5	19.12.2006	Copy of registered simple mortgage deed
A6	04.04.2015	Copy of loan application
A7	04.04.2015	Copy of request facilities
A8	04.04.2015	Copy of sanction letter
A9	04.04.2015	Copy of memorandum of loan agreement
A10	04.04.2015	Copy of covenants letter
A11	04.04.2015	Copy of undertaking letter
A12	01.04.2015	Copy of registered simple mortgage deed
A13 & A14	19.10.2009, 22.07.2015	Copies of revival letters
A15, A16 & A17	19.03.2018 (3)	Copies of revival letters
A18 & A19	07.01.2021, 13.01.2021	Copies of revival letters

¶79

OA 1375/2023

¶80

¶81

A20	15.09.2022	Copies of revival letters
A21	10.12.2018	Copy of Acknowledgement of liability letter
A22 & A23	26.11.2021	Copies of the legal notices
A24	--	Statement of account
A25	--	Statement of account

¶82

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

¶83

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Smt Parwathamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Smt Parwathamma

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

Union Bank of India versus Sukumar Mohan

State Bank of India versus Rahul

Canara Bank versus Sgr Infratech Solution

Canara Bank versus Santhosh Kumar H M

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Bairaiah Since Dead by His Lrs and Others

Canara Bank versus Sri. S C Ravikumar Prop of Dodmane Poultry Farm