Allowed

State Bank of India v. Prathima

DRT19 Sept 2025OA/690/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for a recovery certificate against the defendant for a housing loan default, modifying the interest rate to 7% simple and permitting recovery from personal assets and scheduled property.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 53,75,927/- plus interest at 7% p.a. (simple) recoverable from defendant personally and schedule property.

State Bank of India versus Prathima — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.690/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India, Represented by its Chief Manager, Mr. Nagendra N, Stressed Asset Recovery Branch (SARB) JC Road, Bangalore- 560002.

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Mrs. Prathima Hebbar, W/o Mr. Radhakrishna Rao Lambu, Aged about 37 years, #A1-016, Century Commanders Vista, Attur Layout, Ramanashree California Resort, Yelahanka, Bangalore North, Bengaluru- 560064.

¶9

Also having address at:

¶10

a) Mrs. Prathima Hebbar, Flat No. 1 E08, ‘E’ Block, First Floor, Shanders Dwellington Residential Complex, Chikkanagamangala Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru- 560099.

¶11

B) Mrs. Prathima Hebbar, Office at: Quantum Leap learning solutions Pvt. Ltd., #86, 3^rd Floor, Sudhodaya Railway Parallel Road, Kumarapark West, Bangalore- 560020.

...DEFENDANT

OA 690/2024

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : M/s. R & J Associates Defendant : Exparte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs. 53,75,927/- (Rupees Fifty Three lakh Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Seven only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed Home loan of Rs. 45,90,000/- (Rupees Forty Five Lakh Ninety Thousand only) for purchase of an apartment.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents along with deed of undertaking, memorandum of loan agreement and memorandum of deposit.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account 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

¶23

by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount

OA 690/2024

due in the account.

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 05.02.2025.

¶28

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-12 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

¶32

as against the defendant?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

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, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the

¶36

OA 690/2024

¶37

¶38

defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above

¶39

documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶43

availed for Housing purpose and also that the 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 7.00% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.690/2024, stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶46

53,75,927/- (Rupees Fifty Three lakh Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Seven only) with further interest @7.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally

¶49

OA 690/2024

¶50

¶51

and her assets are liable for respective amounts due under the loan

¶52

account.

¶53

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶57

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶59

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

¶60

Rules, 1993.

¶61

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 19^th Day of September, 2025].

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

(T. RAJESH)

¶64

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶65

ANNEXURES

¶66

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶67

AW-1: Nagaraj V S/o Late Nagappa, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	12.11.2020	Application form
A2	21.11.2020	Sanction letter

¶70

OA 690/2024

¶71

¶72

A3	21.11.2020	Arrangement letter
A4	24.11.2020	Affidavit
A5	24.11.2020	Deed of undertaking
A6	24.11.2020	Agreement to mortgage
A7	24.11.2020	Memorandum of loan agreement of home loan granted to public
A8	02.12.2020	Memorandum of deposit
A9 series	03.06.2021	Demand notice and postal receipts
A10 series	04.06.2022	Possession notice, postal receipts, newspaper
A11	--	Statement of Acc. No. 39823994011
A12	--	Banker’s certificate

¶73

Witness Examined for the Defendant: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶74

-Nil -

¶75

-Nil -

¶76

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Prathima

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Prathima

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

Abbas Ca versus Urban Co. operative Bnak Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Sachin Kumar Kaushal

Canara Bank versus M/S Avtar Bag Factory

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Hardik

Ms Habib Agro Industries Rep by Its Partners and Legal Heir of Late Sri Habib Khan and Others versus the Authorised Officer Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd.

Ms Habib Agro Industries Rep by Its Industries Rep by Its Partner and Legal Heirs of Late Sri Habib Khan and Others versus the Authorised Officer Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd.