Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Laxmidevi

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/1798/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application for a Recovery Certificate against two farmers for agricultural loans. The defendants appeared ex parte. The Tribunal reduced the agreed interest rate to 6% simple and granted cost of proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 21,79,489.81 with interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from date of filing, with recovery from joint, several, and personal assets of defendants.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Laxmidevi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 19^th Day of November, 2025

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶5

Presiding Officer

¶6

OA.No.1798/2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Karnataka Grameena Bank, Sirwar Branch, Sriwar, near Deo Durga Cross, Raichur District- 584 129, Represented by its Branch Manager, Mr. Yogesh Kumar Pandey, S/o Narendra Pandey, Aged about 34 years.

¶9

…APPLICANT

¶10

AND:

¶11

Mrs. Laxmidevi, W/o Hanumappa, Aged about 54 years, R/at Nagadaninni Village, Sirwar Taluk, Manvi Sub-district, Raichur District- 584 129.

¶12

Mr. Shivasharana, S/o Late. Veerabhadrappa, Aged about 44 years, R/at. Veerabhadrashwar Medical Store, Opp. Karnataka Gramin Bank, Sirwar Village, Sirwar Taluk, Manvi Sub-District, Raichur District- 584 129. ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Prakasha Hedge K Defendants : EXPARTE

OA 1798/2023

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 defendants for Rs. 21,79,489.81 (Rupees Twenty One Lakh Seventy Nine Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Eighty One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed Kisan OD loan of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh Only) and KCC loan facility of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only).

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with deed of hypothecation and simple mortgage deed.

¶21

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

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal

¶23

by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶24

Despite, summons on defendants, they failed to appear resulting the defendants being set exparte on 09.07.2025.

¶25

OA 1798/2023

¶26

¶27

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-26 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

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 as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶34

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

¶35

OA 1798/2023

¶36

¶37

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

¶38

the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶40

availed for Agriculture 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 6.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.1798/2023, stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶43

21,79,489.81 (Rupees Twenty One Lakh Seventy Nine Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Nine and Paise Eighty One Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally, 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 schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶44

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

¶45

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally & personally and their assets are liable for amounts due under the loan account.

¶46

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶47

OA 1798/2023

¶48

¶49

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

¶50

order.

¶51

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

¶52

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶53

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

¶54

of this final order.

¶55

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶56

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

¶57

Rules, 1993.

¶58

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

¶59

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶60

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1:Anil Kumar, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Application-cum-appraisal form for Kisan OD limits dated 17.06.2009
A2	Agreement and deed for kissan OD dated 7.07.2009
A3	Letter of Co-obligation dated 7.06.2009
A4	Common application form cum appraisal report for credit facilities for agricultural loan dated 27.08.2009

¶66

OA 1798/2023

¶67

¶68

A5	Agreement cum deed of hypothecation for agricultural loans dated 10.09.2009
A6	Letter of co-obligation dated 27.08.2009
A7	Application-cum-sanction for renewal and/ or enhancement under Kissan OD dated 14.03.2011
A8	Letter of renewal dated 14.03.2011
A9	Simple mortgage deed dated 04.07.2009
A10	Simple mortgage deed dated 07.09.2009
A11	Letter of revival dated 02.07.2012
A12	Letter of revival dated 02.05.2015
A13	Letter of revival dated 10.04.2018
A14	Letter of revival dated 10.04.2018
A15	Letter of revival dated 24.11.2020
A16	Letter of revival dated 24.11.2020
A17	Letter of revival dated 04.09.2012
A18	Letter of revival dated 18.08.2015
A19	Letter of revival dated 02.07.2018
A20	Letter of revival dated 16.06.2021
A21	Acknowledgement of security/ liability from mortgagors dated 16.07.2019
A22	Acknowledgement of security/ liability from mortgagors dated 27.03.2020
A23	Statement of accounts in loan account No. 2009000004, re numbered as account No. 10819120000094
A24	Statement of accounts in loan account No. 2009000157 re- numbered account No. 1018930000723 and then re-numbered account No. 81915354081412
A25	Legal Notice dated 17.10.2023
A26	Postal receipts

¶69

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Laxmidevi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Laxmidevi

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