Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sakila

DRT27 Nov 2025OA/1588/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application seeking issuance of recovery certificate against the defendants for Rs. 52.35 lakhs as legal heirs of the deceased borrower was allowed. The recovery certificate is to be drawn availing reduced interest at 6.00% per annum simple interest.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 52,35,669.96 with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till realization from the defendants to the extent of the

Icici Bank Limited versus Sakila — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1588/2020

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India State Bank of Hyderabad, Shahapur Branch, Shahapur Taluk, Yadgiri District Asset recovery management Branch, 2^nd floor, A block, BKG complex, Mysore bank circle, Avenue road, Bangalore – 560 009

¶7

Represented by Chief Manager Sri. Vishwanath Hegde …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Devikamma W/o. late Sharanappa Talawar Aged about 50 years

¶10

Smt. Nagamma D/o. late Sharanappa Talawar Aged about 35 years

¶11

Smt. Ningamma D/o. late Sharanappa Talawar Aged about 32 years

¶12

Sri. Devendrappa S/o. late Sharanappa Talawar Aged about 30 years

¶13

All are residing at: Chennur-K, Post-Wangadurg, Shahapura Taluk, Yadgir District – 585 223 ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

OA-1588/2020

¶15

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : T S Mahabaleswara Defendants : Ex parte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 52,35,669.96/- (Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Nine and Paisa Ninety Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower. The Late borrower Sharanappa Talawar had availed the following credit facilities:

¶21

Agricultural term loan limit of Rs. 4,97,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Only) for the purpose of purchase of tractor and accessories and tractor and trailer.

¶22

1^st Rephrased of Rs. 3,91,690/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety One Thousand Six Hundred and Ninety Only) on 25.03.2010.

¶23

2^nd rephrased of Rs. 1,04,850/- (Rupees One Lakh Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Only) on 26.03.2010.

¶24

The deceased borrower executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loans, interest, cost and charges. The Late borrower Sharanappa Talawar had also executed Simple Mortgage Deed dated 10.01.2005.

¶25

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities,

¶26

OA-1588/2020

¶27

¶28

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 accounts as NPA.

¶29

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.

¶30

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 14.10.2024.

¶31

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-13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶32

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.

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

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

¶35

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶36

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶37

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶38

unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. The evidence tendered

¶39

by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The

¶40

OA-1588/2020

¶41

¶42

evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are

¶43

sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA,

¶44

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶45

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the

¶46

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶47

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

¶48

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶49

Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶50

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶51

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived

¶52

at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view

¶53

that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶54

In the result, OA.No.1588/2020 stands allowed,

¶55

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

¶56

Rs. 52,35,669.96/- (Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Six

¶57

Hundred and Sixty Nine and Paisa Ninety Six Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants to the extent of their inheritance of any estate form the deceased borrower Sharanappa Talawar, after

¶58

giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the

¶59

OA-1588/2020

¶60

¶61

pendency of the OA allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding

¶62

against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be

¶63

the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶64

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

¶65

liability, the defendants to the extent of their inherited form the deceased Sharanappa Talawar is liable to the proceeds against for the balance amount.

¶66

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶67

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

¶68

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

¶69

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶70

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

¶71

terms of this final order.

¶72

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶73

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

¶74

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶75

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of November, 2025].

¶76

Sd/-

¶77

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-1588/2020

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶82

AW-1: Sri. Rama Nagappa Moger, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶83

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶84

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	------	Affidavit evidence
A2	------	List of documents
A3	12.01.2005	Loan application
A4	12.01.2005	Sanction and terms and condition letter
A5	12.01.2005	Hypothecation agreement
A6	10.01.2005	Registered simple mortgage deed
A7	-----	R C books deposited with the bank
A8	11.01.2019	Legal notice
A9 & A10	------	One postal receipt and one returned RPD cover
A11 to A13	------	Statement of accounts extract three numbers

¶85

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶86

-Nil -

¶87

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶88

-Nil -

¶89

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶90

Sd/-

Icici Bank Limited v. Sakila

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sakila

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

Hdfc Bank versus Ashok Kumar

Canara Bank versus Amarjit Singh

Ajay Kashyap versus Piramal Capital

Ms Hi Tech Constructions versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Lal Babu Singh

Isaac john gill versus Bank of Baroda