Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sri K H Shivabasappa

DRT27 Nov 2025OA/279/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by a bank against a defendant in ex-parte proceedings. Upon finding the claim established, the Court issued a reduced-order Recovery Certificate with an aggregated principal sum of Rs. 25,48,654.46 to be recovered with 6% simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 25,48,654.46 with 6% p.a. simple interest; recoverable via execution against defendant and schedule property.

Union Bank of India versus Sri K H Shivabasappa — Banking and Recovery | 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.279/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Union Bank of India B H Road, Shivamogga Branch, 1^st floor, Omkar Omate Building, Near Bhima Jewelers, Shivamogha, Karnataka – 577201 Through its Chief Manager Sri. Y Shashidhara … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. K.H. Shivabasappa S/o. Hanumappa Aged about 50 years R/o. 56, Billahalli village, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District, Karnataka – 577221

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M/s. V S Associates Defendant : Exparte

¶13

:FINAL ORDER:

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for

¶15

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶16

OA. No.279/2024

¶17

¶18

Rs.25,48,654.46 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Four and Forty Six Paisa only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed financial facility for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- on 03.06.2016 and Rs.7,50,000/- for agricultural purposes.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendant executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

OA. No.279/2024

¶24

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 07.01.2025.

¶26

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A21 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

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

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶33

remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence

¶34

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 security interest as claimed by the

¶35

OA. No.279/2024

¶36

¶37

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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

¶38

within the limitation.

¶39

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶40

issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶42

were availed for agricultural 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 6.00%

¶43

p.a.(simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.279/2024 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶46

of Rs.25,48,654.46 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Forty Eight

¶47

Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Four and Forty Six Paisa only) with

¶48

further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant, after giving credit to all the

¶49

amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA

¶50

OA. No.279/2024

¶51

¶52

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against

¶53

defendant personally and also by proceeding against the schedule

¶54

property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule

¶55

property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶56

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

¶57

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶58

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶59

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

¶60

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶61

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

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

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.279/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Sri. Chukka Ramna Reddy, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Loan Application Dated 02.06.2016
A2	Sanction letter dated 03.06.2016
A3	Loan application dated 02.06.2016
A4	Sanction letter dated 02.06.2016
A5	Agreement for Term Loans dated 03.06.2016
A6	Common deed of Hypothecation of Crops/Stocks dated 03.06.2016
A7	Letter of Undertaking/Declaration dated 03.06.2016
A8	Acknowledgement of Debt/Liability dated 26.02.2019
A9	Applicant issued Notice of rephrasing repayment schedule to Defendant dated 17.06.2019
A10	Composite Debit Balance Confirmation (with security) dated 27.09.2021
A11	Common Deed of Hypothecation of Crops/Stocks dated 03.06.2016
A12	Demand Promissory Note dated 03.06.2016
A13	Take Delivery Letter to D.P.N. dated 03.06.2016
A14	Letter of Authority dated 03.06.2016
A15	Acknowledgement of Debt/Liability dated 26.02.2019
A16	Applicant issued Notice rephrasing of repayment schedule to Defendant, Dated 18.06.2019
A17	Composite Debit Balance Confirmation (with security) 27.09.2021
A18	Loan Recall Notice dated 25.10.2021

¶72

OA. No.279/2024

¶73

¶74

A19	Legal notice dated 01.12.2023
A20	True Extract of Statement of Account pertaining to the Defendant' aforesaid Loan Account No.560941000217164
	True Extract of Statement of Account pertaining
A21	to the Defendant' aforesaid Loan Account No.560961000298392

¶75

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Sri K H Shivabasappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sri K H Shivabasappa

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