Allowed

Federal Bank Limited v. Binu Varghese

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/324/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recovery Tribunal allowed Original Application by Federal Bank Limited against two defendants. Tribunal issued Recovery Certificate for loans availed for agriculture, reducing interest to 6% p.a. despite default, permitting recovery from properties and jointly and severally from defendants.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.25,14,705.16 plus 6.00% simple interest from filing date, recoverable from properties and defendants jointly and severally.

Federal Bank Limited versus Binu Varghese — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of August, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.324/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

The Federal Bank Limited Having its registered office at Aluva, Kerala State and interalia one of Its Branch Office at Udupi, Manasa Towers, Court Road, Udupi, Udupi District-576101, Rep. by its Branch Manager & PA Holder … APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Mr. Binu Varghese S/o. Varghese, Aged about 51 years,

¶9

Mrs. Deepthi Binu W/o. Binu Varghese, Aged about 40 years,

¶10

Both are R/at: Silva Cottage, Behind Kundeshwara Temple, Kundapura, Udupi District-576201

¶11

Also at: Thannuvalil, Pulikurumba Chemberi, Kerala – 670632 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

OA. No. 324/2023

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Sri. Nagaraj Damodar Defendants : Exparte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.25,14,705.16 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred Five and Sixteen Paise only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant No.1 as principle borrower and defendant No.2 as co-obligant have availed FKCC loan – I for sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for cultivation of crops and AMTL-loan – II for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- for development of agriculture.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage and hypothecation over the Schedule properties.

¶19

OA. No. 324/2023

¶20

¶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 accounts 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 accounts.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 07.11.2024.

¶24

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 A17 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

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

¶28

OA. No. 324/2023

¶29

¶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 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 security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶33

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶34

was availed for agriculture 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%

¶35

(simple).

¶36

OA. No. 324/2023

¶37

Hence in view of the above finding which cover both the

¶38

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

¶39

In the result, OA.No.324/2023 stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.25,14,705.16 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred Five and Sixteen Paise only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶41

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶42

OA. No. 324/2023

¶43

¶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 receipt of the order.

¶46

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

¶47

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

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

¶49

with this Final Order.

¶50

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶51

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of

¶52

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶53

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th Day of August 2025].

¶54

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶55

ANNEXURES

¶56

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶57

AW-1: Shrikrishna Sharma K, Assistant Vice President of the applicant bank.

¶58

OA. No. 324/2023

¶59

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Loan application (FKCC) dated 19.11.2010
A2	Loan application (AMTL) dated 19.11.2010
A3	Sanction letter (FKCC) dated 19.11.2010
A4	Sanction letter(AMTL)dated 20.11.2010
A5	On demandpronote(FKCC)dated 22.11.2010
A6	On demandpronote(AMTL)dated 22.11.2010
A7	Agreement for agricultural loan (FKCC) dated 22.11.2010
A8	Agreement for agricultural loan (AMTL) dated 22.11.2010
A9	Letter of deposit of title deeds dated 23.11.2010
A10	Letter of deposit of title deeds dated 13.11.2012
A11	Agreement for agricultural loans dated 26.02.2014
A12	Acknowledgment of debt and security dated 04.01.2016
A13	Acknowledgement of debt and security dated 19.12.2018
A14	Acknowledgment of debt and security dated 21.08.2021
A15	Recall notice dated 06.10.2022 along with postal receipts and AD card/returned covers
A16	Statement of account extract in respect of FKCC account No.15745500000602
A17	Statement of account extract in respect of AMTL account No. 1574660000299

¶62

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Federal Bank Limited v. Binu Varghese

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank Limited v. Binu Varghese

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

Punjab National Bank versus Kavita

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Amit Kumar

Central Bank of India versus M/S Fortress Packaging Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Lanvin Exports versus Canara Bank

Mrs Gayathri S and Another versus Tumkur Grain Merchants Cooperative Bank Limited

K R Nagesh versus Katta Radhakrishnaiah Nagesh