Original Application under section 19 RDB Act for recovery certificate filed by Karnataka Grameena Bank against defendant for defaulted loan declared allowed ex parte; order allows recovery of principal, interest at 6%, and costs.
Recovery of Rs. 45,52,194.40 plus interest at 6% p.a., costs awarded, and Recovery Certificate drawn up for execution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU
Dated this 25th Day of November, 2025
Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer
OA.No.1725/2023
BETWEEN:
Karnataka Grameena Bank, (Erstwhile Karnataka Gramin Bank), Sirwar Branch, 1st Floor, Shivani Complex, Main Road, Near Deodurga Cross, Sirwar Taluk, Raichur District, Karnataka -584129, Rep. by its Senior Manager,
…APPLICANT
AND:
Sri. Gundappa, S/o. Rangappa, R/at. Marata, Manvi Taluk, Raichur District -584129.
...DEFENDANT
Counsel on record/appeared for:
Applicant : Sri. Prakasha Hegde K Defendant : Exparte
FINAL ORDER
filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 45,52,194.40 (Rupees forty-five lakh fifty-two thousand one
OA 1725/2023
2
hundred ninety-four and paisa forty only) with further interest thereon and cost from the Defendant.
OA 1725/2023
3
OA claim as against the defendant?
Both these issues are gone into and decided together.
OA 1725/2023
4
loan amount due are also proved by the above documents. The
claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.
to the conclusion that the OA is liable to be allowed.
of Rs. 45,52,194.40 (Rupees forty five lakh fifty two thousand
one hundred ninety four and paisa forty only) with pendente lite and future interest of 6.00% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing
OA till the realization, from the Defendant personally after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, and allow the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. Property schedule
to the OA be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate.
OA 1725/2023
5
to proceed against for the shortfall if any to recover the balance amount due.
iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings
for which Applicant to file cost memo within seven days from the date of receipt of the order.
iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this
order and transferred to Recovery for execution.
v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of
in terms of this final order.
in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16
of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.
(Dictated to PY directly on the Computer, after its transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 25th day of November, 2025)
Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER
ANNEXURES
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:
AW-1: Sri. Yogesh Kumar Pandey, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.
OA 1725/2023
6
Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:
| Exhibit Nos. |
Date | Particulars of Documents |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | -- | Evidence Affidavit |
| A2 | -- | List of Documents |
| A3 | 16.09.2004 | Loan Application |
| A4 | 21.09.2004 | Sanction memorandum |
| A5 | 09.10.2004 | Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural loans |
| A6 | 06.10.2010 | Simple mortgage deed |
| A7 | 11.07.2007 | Letter of Revival |
| A8 | 10.06.2010 | Letter of Revival |
| A9 | 06.06.2012 | Letter of Revival |
| A10 | 11.05.2015 | Letter of Revival |
| A11 | 24.07.2017 | Letter of Revival |
| A12 | 12.06.2020 | Letter of Revival |
| A13 | 22.09.2022 | Letter of Revival |
| A14 | -- | Statement of account |
| A15 | 23.08.2023 | Legal notice |
| A16 | -- | Postal receipt |
Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -
Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant succeeded in proving the claim as against the defendant?
If so, to what extent?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Karnataka Grameena Bank
T. RAJESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
