Allowed

Bank of India v. Sri Maruthi Enterprises

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/1563/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against defaulting borrowers. Despite the defendants appearing ex parte, the court found the bank’s evidence uncontroverted and admissible, proving the loan availment and default.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 37,17,319/- plus 12% p.a. simple interest from filing date to realization, enforceable against defendants’ assets.

Bank of India versus Sri Maruthi Enterprises — Specific Performance | 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1563/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Bank of India Branch office at J.P. Nagar, No.2, Vasudhaa 38^th Main, J.P. Nagar 6^th Phase, Bengaluru-560078 Rep. by its Chief Manager Mr. Ajith Ananda Deshmukh

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. Maruthi Enterprises Represented by its Proprietor Mr. Chethan B M #51, 1^st Floor, Sri. Sai Krishna Nilaya, 2^nd A Main Road, Gokul Extesnion, Muthyala Nagar, Bangalore-560054

¶11

Mr. Chethan B M S/o. Mr. Mahalinga Gowda Aged about 37 years, # Byadagere at post, Gubbi Tq Kadaba Hobli, Byadagere, Tumakuru, Karnataka - 572219 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Mr. K. Raveendran Defendants : Exparte :FINAL ORDER:

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶15

OA. No.1563/2024

¶16

¶17

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.37,17,319/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred and Nineteen only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed cash credit facility of Rs.7.50 lakhs and term loan of Rs.22.50 lakhs on 31.07.2020.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed

¶23

OA. No.1563/2024

¶24

¶25

to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 18.12.2024.

¶26

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A22 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

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

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

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

¶33

as stated in the OA, as to the execution of loan documents as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the

¶34

OA. No.1563/2024

¶35

¶36

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

Hence in view of the above finding which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities was availed for business purpose and also that 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 12.00% (simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.1563/2024 stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.37,17,319/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred and Nineteen only) with further interest of 12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from defendants, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets of the defendants, including the schedule are liable for all such amounts due under

¶41

OA. No.1563/2024

¶42

¶43

the loan account. The schedule to the OA be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate.

¶44

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

¶45

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶46

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶47

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶49

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.1563/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶57

AW-1: Ajit Ananda Deshmukh, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶58

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶59

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Application form for Micro & Small Enterprises (MSEs) dated 22.07.2020
A2	Sanction of working capital and term loan dated 31.07.2020
A3 & A4	On demand promissory note dated 31.07.2020 for Rs.7.50 and Rs.22.50 lakhs
A5	Agreements in Form L-56 by defendant No.1 dated 31.07.2020 for Rs.7.50 & Rs.22.50 lakhs
A6	Hypothecation cum loan agreement dated 31.07.2020
A7 & A8	Loan bearer letters in form No. L-435 dated 31.07.2020
A9	Loan installment letter in form No. L-440 dated 31.07.2020
A10	MCLR Agreement – new loans dated 31.07.2020
A11	Authorization letter dated 31.07.2020
A12	Agreement of financial information to information utilities dated 31.07.2020
A13	Compliance of bank’s guidelines on the responsible financing dated 31.07.2020
A14	Authorization letter

¶60

OA. No.1563/2024

¶61

¶62

A15	Acknowledgment of debt/securities in form L4444 C dated 05.06.2023
A16	Acknowledgment of debt/securities in form L4444 C dated 19.04.2024
A17	Offer cum acceptance letter for restructuring for loans dated 24.06.2021
A18	On demand promissory notes dated 28.06.2021 for Rs.1.50 lakhs
A19	Agreement of funded interest term (FITL) dated 28.06.2021
A20	Statement of account in respect of cash credit facility account No.841330110000116
A21	Statement of account int respect of term loan account No.841370410000106
	Statement of account in respect of FITL account
A22	No.841365910000003 along with interest sheet and certificate

¶63

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of India v. Sri Maruthi Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Sri Maruthi Enterprises

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