Allowed

State Bank of India v. Noor Mohammed

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/1550/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, to issue a Recovery Certificate. The court reduced the interest rate from card rate to 8% simple interest and directed recovery from the defendant via personal liability and schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate to be issued allowing recovery of Rs. 60,69,527/- plus 8% simple interest from the date of OA, enforceable against personal assets and schedule properties.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1550/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India Stressed assets recovery Branch, JC road, 3^rd Floor, near shivaji theatre, Bengaluru – 560 001

¶7

Represented by Its Chief Manager, Sri. K K Rastogi …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Shri. Noor Mohammed S/o. Hasrath Ali no.74, 2nd main, New Guruppanapalya, Bengaluru – 560 029

¶10

Also at: Flat no. 184, 1^st floor, DS max Sarovar Sy. No. 25, Attibelle Village, Bengaluru – 562 107

¶11

Also at: M/s. A S Interiors No. 62, /63, S Janardana Mansion, 8^th Main Road, Gurapanapalya, Bengaluru – 560 029 ...DEFENDANT

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M Anitha Defendant : Ex parte

OA-1550/2024

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. 60,69,527/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

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

¶19

Housing loan of Rs. 55,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five

¶20

Lakhs Only) for the purpose of Purchase of new house/flat.

¶21

SBI-Suraksha loan of Rs. 2,14,755/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Five Only) on 16.03.2023.

¶22

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 deposit of title deeds.

¶23

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in compliance of the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶24

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

¶25

OA-1550/2024

¶26

¶27

the amount due in the account.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 18.12.2024.

¶29

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-10 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶32

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA 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 unrebutted as defendant remained ex parte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed.

¶36

The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible

¶37

and are 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

¶38

OA-1550/2024

¶39

¶40

amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶41

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶42

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

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Housing purpose and also that the 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).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.1550/2024, stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 60,69,527/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Five

¶46

Hundred and Twenty Seven Only) with further interest @8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to

¶47

be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶48

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

¶49

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant

¶50

OA-1550/2024

¶51

¶52

personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶53

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of

¶54

receipt of the order.

¶55

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

¶56

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶57

v) Interim application pending, if any, are disposed of with this

¶58

Final Order.

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶60

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

¶61

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 19^th Day of November, 2025].

¶63

PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

OA-1550/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Smt. Jayalakshmi, W/o. Sri. Ramchandra S, Chief Manager, of

¶70

Applicant Bank.

¶71

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶72

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Loan application–HL
A2	Arrangement letter dated 02.03.2023 & certificate of insurance dated 24.03.2023
A3	Memorandum of loan agreement dated 02.03.2023
A4	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated 03.03.2023
A5	Confirmation of deposit of title deeds 03.03.2023
A6	Absolute sale deed dated 03.03.2023
A7	Demand notice dated 27.07.2023
A8	Paper publication
A9	Foreclosure/statement of accounts
A10	Foreclosure/statement of accounts

¶73

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

¶74

-Nil -

¶75

-Nil -

¶76

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Noor Mohammed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Noor Mohammed

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 (Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Jagar @Jaggar Singh @Ujjagar Singh

State Bank of India versus Manjit Kaur

Ms Supreme Briquettes versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Praveen

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Raja Ram Mishra