Allowed

State Bank of India v. Ramesh Babu Mylapilli

DRT27 Nov 2025OA/987/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate against a defaulting borrower in an ex parte proceeding. The court reduced the interest rate to 8% simple, permitting recovery from personal assets and mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate granted for Rs. 63,95,336/- with 8% simple interest from filing date, recoverable from defendant and schedule properties.

State Bank of India versus Ramesh Babu Mylapilli — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.987/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India No. 12, 80 Ft Road, 7^th Main, 3^rd Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru – 560 034

¶6

Represented by its Authorized Officer & Chief Manager Sri. Jagadish A Badiger …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Mr. Ramesh Babu Mylapilli S/o. Upendra Rao Mylapilli 2-183/1, Vedapalem, Calingapatnam, Srikakulam District, Andrapradesh – 532 406

¶9

Also at: E-703, Purva Mid-Town Apartment Dooravani Nagar FCI Go=Down Road, Bangalore – 560 016

¶10

Also at: EMP: no. S204037 Account management SAATCHI & SAATCHI pvt. Ltd., 3^rd floor, SN tower, Trinity circle, Bangalore – 560 001 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

OA-987/2023

¶12

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : K M Sanath Kumara Defendant : Ex parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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. 63,95,336/- (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed an housing loan of Rs. 55,40,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Lakhs Forty Thousand Only) to purchase a residential immovable site property.

¶18

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 deposit of title deeds.

¶19

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

¶20

OA-987/2023

¶21

¶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, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 15.10.2024.

¶24

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-15 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

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

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶31

unrebutted as defendant remained ex parte. The evidence tendered

¶32

by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed.

¶33

The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible

¶34

and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the

¶35

OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in

¶36

OA-987/2023

¶37

¶38

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

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are 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 8.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.987/2022, stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 63,95,336/- (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Six Only) with further interest @8.00% 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 the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶43

OA-987/2023

¶44

¶45

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

¶46

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant

¶47

personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶48

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.

¶49

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

¶50

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

v) Interim application pending, if any, are disposed of with this

¶52

Final Order.

¶53

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶54

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

¶55

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶56

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

¶57

the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of November, 2025].

¶58

PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

OA-987/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶64

AW-1: Raviprakash H V, S/o. Vishwanath Shatry, Chief Manager, of

¶65

Applicant Bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant

¶67

Exhibit Nos.	date	Particulars of Documents
A1	-----	Affidavit of evidence
A2	-----	List of documents
A3	24.07.2029	Application for loan
A4	21.08.2019	Arrangement letter
A5	21.08.2019	Sanction letter
A6	21.08.2019	Memorandum of loan agreement
A7	21.08.2019	Letter of undertaking
A8	31.08.2019	Deposit of title deeds
A9	03.09.2019	Encumbrance certificate
A10	18.062019	Agreement of sale
A11	31.08.2019	Sale deed
A12	21.08.2019	affidavit
A13	17.02.2021	Demand notice
A14	09.06.2011	Possession notice
A15	24.06.2022	Computer output of loan closure enquiry and account extract

¶68

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶69

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶70

Sd/-

State Bank of India v. Ramesh Babu Mylapilli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Ramesh Babu Mylapilli

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

Hdfc Bank versus Ashok Kumar

Canara Bank versus Amarjit Singh

Ajay Kashyap versus Piramal Capital

Ms Hi Tech Constructions versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Lal Babu Singh

Isaac john gill versus Bank of Baroda