Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Geetha S

DRT25 Nov 2025OA/229/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for a recovery certificate against the borrower, who appeared ex parte. Evidence showed the defendant availed loans for business and defaulted. Interest was reduced to 12% simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.25,84,166-plus interest at 12% p.a. (simple) from filing date. Liberty to proceed against personal assets. Cost awarded.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.229/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameena Bank Branch office at No.2236, 1^st Floor, 23^rd Cross Road, Karesandra, Banashankari 2^nd Stage, Banashankari, Bengaluru-560070 Rep. by its Branch Manager, Abhishek R. M. …

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Geetha S Proprietor of M/s. Bilva Beauty Saloon, Aged about 51 years, #7/A, 2^nd Cross, Ashok Nagar, Behind BMS College, Bengaluru-560050 Also at: No.67/10, South Avenue Complex, Nagasandra Circle, D.V.G. Road, Bengaluru- 560041

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Smt. M. Anitha Defendant : Exparte

¶13

:FINAL ORDER:

¶14

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

¶15

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for

¶16

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶17

OA. No.229/2025

¶18

¶19

Rs.25,84,166/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Eighty Four Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Six only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed Cash Credit loan of Rs.1,00,000/- and Term loan of Rs.9,00,000/- for the purpose of running business.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 09.07.2025.

¶25

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed

¶26

OA. No.229/2025

¶27

¶28

their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

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

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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, as to the execution of loan documents as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the 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.

¶35

OA. No.229/2025

¶36

¶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 were 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.229/2025 stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶41

of Rs.25,84,166/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Eighty Four Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Six only) with further interest of 12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from defendant, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA.

¶42

ii) In the event of failure of the defendant to pay the

¶43

aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to proceed against the defendant personally and other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶44

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶45

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

¶46

OA. No.229/2025

¶47

¶48

receipt of the order.

¶49

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

¶50

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶52

with this Final Order.

¶53

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶54

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

¶55

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 25^th Day of November 2025].

¶56

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶57

ANNEXURES

¶58

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶59

AW-1: Sri. Abhishek B.M., Branch Manager of the applicant bank.

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Annexure	Particulars
	Loan Application for Cash Credit/Term Loan/
A1	Composite Term Loan Dated 02.03.2016 And
	Project Report
A2	Sanction letter dated 02.03.2016
A3	Hypothecation cum Guarantee Agreement dated 02.03.2016

¶62

OA. No.229/2025

¶63

	Agreement for Advances Form-12 Agreement to
A4	Secure an Advance against Hypothecation of Goods dated 02.03.2016
A5	Sanction letter dated 02.03.2016
	Agreement for Advances Form-12 Agreement to
A6	secure and Advance against hypothecation of Goods dated 02.03.2016
A7	On Demand Promissory note dated 02.03.2016
A8	Acknowledgment of liability dated 14.12.2017
A9	Acknowledgment of liability dated 20.02.2019
A10	Letter of Revival dated 20.11.2021
A11	Acknowledgment of liability dated 14.12.2017
A12	Acknowledgment of liability dated 20.02.2019
A13	Letter of Revival dated 20.11.2021
A14	Legal notice dated 19.10.2024
A15	Postal receipt
A16	RPAD status
A17	Statement of account in No.42210115000116
A18	Statement of account in No.12210130000047

¶64

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Geetha S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Geetha S

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

Basil Co. versus Kerala Gramin Bank

Uco Bank versus Sh. Bachchan Kumar Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Bhagwant Singh

Indu Kumari Pandey versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus M/S K. K. Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Mr. Praveen