Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Annapurna Sajjan

DRT19 Sept 2025OA/833/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The court found the defendants'答辩 defaults unrebutted and admissible evidence sufficient, awarding recovery of the principal sum plus interest limited to 6% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued directing repayment of Rs. 20,16,080/-. Interest fixed at 6% per annum from filing date. Proceedings against defendants jointly, severally, personally and against schedule

Icici Bank Limited versus Annapurna Sajjan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.833/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

ICICI Bank Ltd., Branch office at Haadimani Complex, Adilpur Area, Garage Line, B B Road, Shahapur, Yadgir, Karnataka – 585223 Rep. by its Collection Manager &

¶8

POA Holder Sri. Pramodh G … APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Smt. Annapurna Sajjan W/o. Channabasappa Sajjan, Aged about 60 years Maradagi Andola, Jewargi, Kalaburagi – 585303

¶11

Sri. Siddanna Channabasapp Sajjan S/o. Channabasappa Sajjan Aged about 47 years Maradagi Andola, Jewargi, Kalaburagi – 585303 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M/s. S. A. Associates Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.833/2024

FINAL ORDER

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.20,16,080/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Sixteen Thousand and Eighty only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the Kisan Credit Card with limit of Rs.10,00,000/- on 23.02.2018.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the schedule property.

¶20

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, 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.

¶21

OA. No.833/2024

¶22

¶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

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 28.01.2025.

¶25

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 A7 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

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

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶32

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The

¶33

OA. No.833/2024

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also

¶37

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

¶38

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶39

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

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶41

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% (simple).

¶42

In the result, OA.No.833/2024 stands allowed,

¶43

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶44

of Rs.20,16,080/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Sixteen Thousand and

¶45

OA. No.833/2024

¶46

¶47

Eighty only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the

¶48

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.

¶49

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

¶50

for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶51

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

OA. No.833/2024

¶57

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶59

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

¶60

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶61

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 22^nd Day of September 2025].

¶62

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

ANNEXURES

¶64

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Sri. Pramodh Gurumallappa, Collection Manager of the applicant bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶67

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Farmer financing facilities – credit facility application form dated 07.02.2018
A2	Sanction letter dated 23.02.2018
A3	Hypothecation deed dated 07.02.2018
A4	Indenture of mortgage dated 13.03.2018
A5	Legal notice dated 26.06.2023
A6	Postal receipt dated 28.06.2023
A7	Account statement dated 06.12.2023

¶68

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶69

Sd/-

Icici Bank Limited v. Annapurna Sajjan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Annapurna Sajjan

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.