Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Nagarathnamma

DRT5 Dec 2025OA/405/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a recovery certificate application filed by Karnataka Grameena Bank against four respondents for an agricultural tractor loan. The defendants appeared ex parte. The Tribunal validated the loan documents, mortgage, and default claim as uncontroverted. Upon examining the agricultural nature of the loan, it ordered recovery at a reduced simple interest rate of 6.00

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 26,08,591/- with further interest @ 6.00% p.a. (simple) from filing date till realization, executable against the scheduled properties and personal assets of the de

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 05^th Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.405/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank Head Office at: No.32, Sanganakal Road, Gandhinagar, Bellary Branch Office at: Kamadhenahalli Branch, Kolar Taluk, Kolar District

¶6

Represented by its Branch Manager

¶7

Sri. J Venkateshappa …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Nagarathanamma W/o. Sri. Narayana Reddy Aged about 72 years

¶10

Sri. Govinda Reddy S/o. Sri. Narayana Reddy Aged about 47 years

¶11

Sir. Subramani Reddy S/o. Sri. Narayana Reddy Aged about 51 years

¶12

Sir. Changa Reddy S/o. Sri. Narayana Reddy Aged about 44 years

¶13

All are residing at: Manighatta Village, Shanbhoganahalli Post, Kolar Taluk, Kolar District – 563 101 ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

OA-405/2023

¶15

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : T A Harish Defendants : Ex parte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 26,08,591/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Eight Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants no.1 & 2 are availed a tractor loan of Rs. 5,50,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of their agricultural operations.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with mortgage deed.

¶22

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

OA-405/2023

¶25

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 06.02.2024.

¶27

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-3, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-3 to A-19 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 ex parte. 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 facility as stated in the OA,

¶34

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶35

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the

¶36

OA-405/2023

¶37

¶38

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶39

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

¶40

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶42

In the result, OA.No.405/2023 stands allowed,

¶43

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶44

Rs 26,08,591/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Eight Thousand Five

¶45

Hundred and Ninety One Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶46

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

¶47

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶48

OA-405/2023

¶49

¶50

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such

¶51

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶52

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶53

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

¶54

receipt of the order.

¶55

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

¶56

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶57

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

¶58

terms of this final order.

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶60

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

¶61

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶63

the Open Court, this the 05^th Day of December, 2025].

¶64

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-405/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: J Venkateshappa, S/o. Jayaramaiah, Branch Manager, of

¶70

Applicant Bank.

¶71

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶72

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A3	A copy of the loan application dated 19.03.2011
A4	A copy of the loan sanction memorandum dated 18.04.2011
A5	A copy of the loan sanction conveying letter dated 28.06.2011
A6	A copy of the memorandum of agreement for agricultural loan dated 28.06.2011
A7	A copy of the undertaking letter dated 28.06.2011
A8	A copy of the simple mortgage deed dated 16.05.2011
A9	A copy of the authorization letter dated 28.06.2011
A10	A copy of the link letter dated 28.06.2011
A11	A copy of the particulars of goods hypothecated dated 28.06.2011
A12	A copy of the RC book of tractor and trailer
A13 A14	A copy of the revival letter dated 28.12.2016, 30.05.2018 & 07.04.2021
A15
A16 A17	A copy of the similar letters dated 19.05.2014, 19.05.2014
A18	The copies of the legal notice dated 27.12.2021
A19	A copy of the statement of account
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶75

7 OA-405/2023

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Nagarathnamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Nagarathnamma

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

Mr Satya Narayan Prasad versus Union Bank of India

Sangeeta Agrawal versus Punjab National Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Madhuri and Anr.

Mr Aloke Bhattacharjee And Anr. versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S Steel House Private Limited

Canara Bank versus Ms Brahma Surgical Pharma Prop of Mr. Abhishek Raghu Shetty