Allowed

State Bank of India v. Srikanth Rao Boyalapalli

DRT18 Dec 2025OA/86/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act 1993 for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The defendant was absent. The Tribunal reduced the interest rate to 8% per annum while confirming the principal amount and directing recovery against scheduled property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.36,08,555.18 with 8% per annum simple interest, recoverable from the defendant's property and assets.

State Bank of India versus Srikanth Rao Boyalapalli — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 18^th Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.86/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India Stressed Assets Recovery Branch JC Road, Bangalore

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Srikanth Rao Boyalapalli S/o. Sri. Venkateshwara Rao.K R/at: Flat No.833, 6th Cross, Chandra Reddy Building, Thulsi Theatre Road, Marathahalli Colony, Bangalore- 560037

¶9

Also at:

¶10

(i) Flat NO.G-07, Ground Floor, Happy Gardens Layout Sai Kesari Nandan Enclave Seegehalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore- 560049

¶11

(ii) #28-1052-29, Devnagar, Nandyal, Karnool District, Andhra Pradesh- 518501

¶12

(iii) House NO.9-1-333/3 Langer House,

¶13

OA 86/2022

¶14

¶15

Kishan Guda, Hyderabad- 500008’ Office address at:

¶16

(ii) M/S Property Solutions Pvt. Ltd. #2, Krishvi, Ground Floor, Old Airport Road, Domlur, Bangalore-560071

¶17

(iii) #28-1052-29, Devnagar, Nandyal, Karnool District Andhra Pradesh- 518501 ...DEFENDANT

¶18

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶19

Applicant : Guru Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

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 for Rs.36,08,555.18 (Rupees thirty six lakh eight thousand five hundred fifty five and paisa eighteen only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶22

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed the Housing loan credit facilities of Rs.32,00,000/- (Rupees thirty two lakh only) from the applicant bank.

¶23

OA 86/2022

¶24

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with sale deed, memorandum of agreement and agreement to mortgage in favor of the applicant bank.

¶26

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 20.08.2024.

¶29

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-17 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered

¶31

OA 86/2022

¶32

¶33

the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶34

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶35

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

¶36

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶37

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶38

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

¶39

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶40

OA 86/2022

¶41

¶42

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶43

this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶44

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶45

are availed by defendant for Housing loan purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate,

¶46

this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @8% p.a.(Simple).

¶47

In the result, OA.No.86/2022 stands allowed,

¶48

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶49

sum of Rs.36,08,555.18 (Rupees thirty six lakh eight thousand

¶50

five hundred fifty five and paisa eighteen only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple),

¶51

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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶52

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendant

¶53

OA 86/2022

¶54

¶55

personally and his other assets are liable to be proceeded against

¶56

for the balance amount.

¶57

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶58

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

¶59

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶60

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

¶61

in terms of this final order.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶63

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

¶64

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶65

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by

¶66

me in the Open Court, this the 18^th day of December, 2025].

¶67

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 86/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶72

AW-1: Mahesh Kumar Chotia, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1		Home loan application submitted by defendants
A2		Form A Personal details
A3		Form-C (Property & Loan details submitted by defendant
A4	09.11.2017	Memorandum of loan agreement for home loan granted to public
A5	09.11.2017	Arrangement letter for Rs.32.00 Lakh
A6	09.11.2017	LOS Application ID
A7	09.11.2017	Agreement to mortgage
A8	09.11.2017	Deed of undertaking
A9	22.05.2019	Registered Memorandum of Deposit of (Borrower’s Property at RACPC/RCPC/RASMECCC/Home Branch) executed in respect of property bearing flat No.G-7
A10	09.11.2017	Tripartite Agreement executed between Mr. B Srikanth Rao GVT Construction and applicant bank.
A11	09.11.2017	Affidavit submitted by the defendants
A12	09.11.2017	Operations letter submitted by the defendants
A13	09.11.2017	Covering letter for the affidavit
A14	12.10.2020	Demand Notice u/s. 13(2) along with postal acknowledgement sent by the applicant bank.

¶75

OA 86/2022

¶76

¶77

A15	22.05.2019	Registered Absolute Sale deed executed by My life Portfolio Management services Pvt. Ltd. Represented by its GPA Holder GVR Constructions represented by its proprietor in favor of Sri. Boyalapalli Srikanth Rao in respect of Property bearing Flat No.G-07 in ground floor, measuring 1065 Sq.ft.
A16		Certified statement of accounts pertaining to the loan accounts of the defendant
A17		Statement showing the total outstanding in the loan accounts of the defendants

¶78

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

¶79

Sd/
(T. RAJESH)

¶80

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Srikanth Rao Boyalapalli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Srikanth Rao Boyalapalli

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

Paramjeet Singh versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Md Anwar Hussain And Ors. Propietor of Ms Madina Cloth Store versus West Bengal Gramin Bank

Suresh Kumar versus Canara Bank

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Deepak Kumar

Jarina Bibi And Ors. Pro of Ms Bhangari Shop versus Indian Bank

Federal Bank versus M/s Ave Maria Industries