Allowed

State Bank of India v. Rahul

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/1464/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the original application filed by State Bank of India for issuance of Recovery Certificate. The defendant was present ex-parte. The Tribunal found evidence sufficient to prove credit availed, security creation, and defaults, but reduced the interest rate to 6% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 27,87,183/- plus interest at 6% p.a. (simple); proceeds to apply to schedule property then personal assets.

State Bank of India versus Rahul — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 23^rd Day of SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1464/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India

¶6

Represented by its chief manager, Mr. Prasanta Kumar Biswal Assets recovery management branch (ARMB), BKG Complex, Mysore bank circle,

¶7

Avenue road, Bangalore – 560 009 …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Rahul, S/o, Sharanappa bannur, Aged about 45 years, Babalad (I.K) Village, Gulbarga, Gulbarga – 585 102 Also having address at: Plot No. 216, C I B Colony, Gulbarga – 585 102 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant Defendants

¶12

: Rajitha T O : Exparte

OA-1464/2024

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 defendant for Rs. 27,87,183/-(Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand One Hundred and Eighty Three Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed the following credit facilities :

¶18

Agricultural Term loan of Rs. 15,09,614/-(Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Fourteen Only)

¶19

First Rephased Agricultural Term Loan of Rs. 3,95,281/(Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty One Only)

¶20

Second Rephased Agricultural Term Loan of Rs. 8,82,288/(Eight Lakhs Eighty Two Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty Eight Only)

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents along with Hypothecation agreement and Mortgage Deed.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the

¶23

OA-1464/2024

¶24

¶25

defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶26

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.

¶27

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 29.01.2025

¶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-9 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

¶32

claim as against the defendant?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶36

unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered

¶37

OA-1464/2024

¶38

¶39

by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The

¶40

evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are

¶41

sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶46

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶47

In the result, OA.No.1464/2024 stands allowed,

¶48

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶49

Rs. 27,87,183/-(Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Eighty Seven Thousand

¶50

One Hundred and Eighty Three Only) with further interest @6.00 %

¶51

p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered

¶52

OA-1464/2024

¶53

¶54

and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to

¶55

be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Properties

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for balance amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶59

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶63

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

¶64

terms of this final order.

¶65

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶66

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

¶67

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶68

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 23^rd Day of September, 2025].

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-1464/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶75

AW-1: Mr. Vinaya K S/o. Rama Bhatta K, working as Chief Manager, of

¶76

Applicant Bank.

¶77

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶78

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	09.02.2009	The application for agriculture loan term loan
A2	09.02.2009	Letter of arrangement
A3	09.02.2009	Hypothecation agreement
A4	30.01.2009	Mortgage deed
A5	11.06.2013 19.06.2015 And 08.03.2022	Legal notice, Returned postal cover and postal receipt
A6	------	Statement of account no. 62091426746
A7	------	Statement of account no. 62170478548
A8	------	Statement of account no. 62271775761
A9	------	Banker’s certificate

¶79

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶80

-Nil -

¶81

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶82

-Nil -

¶83

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶84

Sd/-

State Bank of India v. Rahul

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rahul

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

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sri Acha Shirishaila

Punjab National Bank versus G Krishnamurhty

Icici Bank Limited versus Svb Infra Projects

Canara Bank versus Veena Shetty

Union Bank of India versus Munivenkate Gowda

Union Bank of India versus Sukumar Mohan