The Tribunal allowed an application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against two defendants who failed to appear. Evidence proved loans defaulted were sued upon a Recovery Certificate with interest @8% p.a. was issued.
Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.59,38,965/- plus further interest at 8% p.a. (simple) recoverable personally or against schedule property.
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 23rd Day of September, 2025
Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1974/2023
BETWEEN:
State Bank of India Branch office at: Stressed Asset Recovery Branch, Bengaluru, No.11/90, 3rd Floor, Near Shivaji Theatre, JC Road, Bengaluru-560002
…APPLICANT
AND:
And Also at: Basaveshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Vijayanagar Badavane, Gopala Extension, Shivamogga, Karnataka-577205
And Also at: No.572, Tharalubalu Badavane, Thevarechatanahalli, Shimoga, Near Pace College, Shimoga-577201
2
OA 1974-2023
Shimoga-577201
And Also at: Basaveshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Vijayanagar Badavane, Gopala Extension, Shivamogga, Karnataka-577205
And Also at: No.572, Tharalubalu Badavane, Thevarechatanahalli, Shimoga, Near Pace College, Shimoga-577201
...DEFENDANTS
Counsel on record/appeared for:
Applicant : Prabhu Rao CB Defendants : Exparte
FINAL ORDER
filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.59,38,964/- (Rupees fifty nine lakh thirty eight thousand nine hundred sixty four only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.
3
OA 1974-2023
OA 1974-2023
4
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.
OA claim as against the defendant?
Both these issues are gone into and decided together.
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 mortgage as claimed by
the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts.
The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due
OA 1974-2023
5
is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.
11. Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this
Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence
this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.
i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.59,38,965/-(Rupees fifty nine lakh thirty eight thousand nine hundred sixty five only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple),
from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants
personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and
received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same
OA 1974-2023
6
to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property.
Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.
(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants personally and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.
iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings
which applicant to file cost memo within 7 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 the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 23rd day of September, 2025].
PRESIDING OFFICER
Sd/ (T. RAJESH)
OA 1974-2023
7
ANNEXURES
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:
AW-1: Govind Laxman Ballal, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.
Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:
| Exhibit Nos. |
Date | Particulars of Documen | ts |
|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | 07.02.2020 | Loan Application | |
| A2 | 19.03.2020 | Arrangement letter | |
| A3 | 19.03.2020 | Copy of the deed of undertaking | |
| A4 | 19.03.2020 | Memorandum of loan agreement loan |
for home |
| A5 | 29.03.2020 | Memorandum relating to title deed | s |
| A6 | 02.04.2020 | Registration of Security acknowledgement report |
intertest |
| A7 | 16.01.2023 | Demand Notice, A/w acknowledgement and photogr affixture of demand notice U/sec 1 SARFAESI Act |
served aphs for 3(2) of the |
| A8 | Statement of Account No.39228268951 |
Bearing | |
| A9 | Statement of Account No.39228432796 |
Bering | |
| A10 | Statement of Account No.40369817980 along with certifi Banker’s Book of Evidence Act. |
bearing cate as per |
Witness Examined for the Defendant:
-Nil -
List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -
Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER
8 OA 1974-2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant succeeded in proving the claim as against the defendant?
What order are to be passed upon the evidence being uncontroverted?
3 provisions across 2 enactments
State Bank of India
Sri. H.K Mallik
Sri. Rakesh H.M
T. RAJESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
