Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Srinivasa Textile Mills

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/768/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Order decided a Recovery Certificate Application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993. The Tribunal allowed the application ex parte after finding the bank's evidence of loan availment, security creation, and default undisputed and sufficient to prove the claim.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate drawn and transferred to Recovery; aggregate sum of Rs. 39,94,421/- with 12% simple interest from filing date till realization.

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Srinivasa Textile Mills — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 19^th Day of November, 2025

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶5

Presiding Officer

¶6

OA.No.768/2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Bank of Baroda Head office situated at: Baroda Bhavan, R.C. Dutt Road, Alkapuri, Vadodara, Gujarat state

¶9

Its Branch office at: Mysore road Branch, No.152, 2^nd main road, 7^th cross, Chamarajpet – 560 018

¶10

Represented by its Chief Manager Mr. Mohan Nayak …APPLICANT

¶11

AND:

¶12

M/s. Srinivasa Textile Mills Represented by proprietor, Mr. Palam Krishna, No.6, 3^rd Cross, Mallathahalli, Gnanga Bharathi, Bangalore – 560 056

¶13

Also at: R/at: no.990, 2^nd main, 4^th block, rajajinagar – 560 010 ...DEFENDANT

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Prakasha Hegde K Defendant : Ex parte

¶16

2 OA-768/2023

¶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. 39,94,421/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty One 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 an Working Capital of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Only) for the purpose of business on 30.01.2016

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendant executed the necessary loan document along with hypothecation agreement.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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 account.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 07.10.2024.

¶24

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

¶25

3 OA-768/2023

¶26

Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced

¶27

Exhibits A-1 to A-16 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 defendant?

¶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 defendant remained ex parte. The evidence tendered

¶34

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,

¶35

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶36

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

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

¶38

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal

¶39

4 OA-768/2023

¶40

is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are

¶42

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view

¶43

that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.768/2023 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶45

Rs. 39,94,421/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Four Hundred and Twenty One Only) with further interest @12.00% 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.

¶46

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and assets are liable for balance amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶47

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

5 OA-768/2023

¶52

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

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

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

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

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

¶58

the Open Court, this the 19^th Day of November, 2025].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1: Ms. S Backialakshmi, D/o. M Sathuragiri, Chief Manager, of

¶64

Applicant Bank.

¶65

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶66

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Evidence affidavit
A2	List of documents
A3	Loan application dated 30.01.2016
A4	Sanction letter dated 30.01.2016
A5	Sanction letter dated 30.01.2018

¶67

6 OA-768/2023

¶68

A6	On demand promissory note dated 30.01.2016
A7	Agreement cum hypothecation deed for priority/non-priority sector advances dated 30.01.2016
A8	Letter of guarantee dated 30.01.2016
A9	Letter of repayment dated 30.01.2016
A10	On demand promissory note dated 30.01.2018
A11	Supplementary agreement dated 30.01.2018
A12	Acknowledgement of liability dated 28.01.2019
A13	Acknowledgement of liability dated 31.03.2020
A14	Statement of account then Vijaya bank loan a/c. 115306341000005, now Bank of Baroda loan account no. 89400500000018
A15	Legal notice dated 28.02.2023
A16	Postal receipt

¶69

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

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

-Nil -

¶72

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Srinivasa Textile Mills

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Srinivasa Textile Mills

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

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Jagar @Jaggar Singh @Ujjagar Singh

State Bank of India versus Manjit Kaur

Ms Supreme Briquettes versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Praveen

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Raja Ram Mishra