Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sumitrabai Sasabal and Others

DRT13 Mar 2026OA/1077/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Karnataka Grameena Bank to issue a Recovery Certificate against three defendants for outstanding agricultural loans totaling Rs. 22,54,512/- with interest capped at 6% p.a. simple. The defendants appeared ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 22,54,512/-. Recovery permitted jointly, severally, personally, and against schedule property. Cost of proceedings allowed to applicant.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sumitrabai Sasabal and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 13^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1077/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameena Bank Jewargi Taluk, Kalaburagi District – 585 212 Represented By Its Branch Manager Sri. Mallikarjuna Biradar …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Sumitrabai Sasabal W/o. Ningappa Sasabal Aged about 59 years R/o. Itaga Village, Jewargi Taluk, Kalaburagi District – 585 212

¶9

2.Sri. Chidanand S/o. Annappa Kshatri Aged about 60 years R/o. Itaga Village, Jewargi Taluk, Kalaburagi District – 585 212

¶10

Sri. Chandravilas S/o. Shivaraya Aged about 58 years R/o. Itaga Village, Jewargi Taluk, Kalaburagi District – 585 212 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M Anitha Defendants : Ex parte

OA-1077/2025

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 22,54,512/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Fifty-Four Thousand Five Hundred and Twelve Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed the following credit facilities:

¶18

KCC loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) for agricultural term loan for irrigation purpose.

¶19

Crop loan of Rs. 2,30,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Thirty Thousand Only) for agricultural allied activities.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above

¶21

availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with mortgage deed.

¶22

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.

¶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

¶25

appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 15.10.2025.

¶26

OA-1077/2025

¶27

¶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-20 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

¶32

claim as against the defendants?

¶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 defendants remained ex parte. 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 defendants and the claim of the amount

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

OA-1077/2025

¶39

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.1077/2025 stands allowed,

¶44

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶45

22,54,512/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Fifty-Four Thousand Five Hundred and Twelve Only) consisting of:

¶46

a. Rs. 16,16,578/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Five

¶47

Hundred and Seventy-Eight Only) with further interest @6.00%

¶48

p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant nos. 1 & 2.

¶49

b. Rs. 6,37,934/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Thirty-Seven Thousand Nine

¶50

Hundred and Thirty-Four Only) with further interest @6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant nos. 1 & 3.

¶51

After giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during

¶52

the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants jointly, severally and personally and

¶53

OA-1077/2025

¶54

¶55

also by proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to

¶56

the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶57

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

¶58

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶59

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such

¶60

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶61

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶62

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

¶63

receipt of the order.

¶64

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

¶65

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶66

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

¶67

terms of this final order.

¶68

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶69

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

¶70

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶71

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 13^th Day of March, 2026].

¶72

Sd/-

¶73

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶74

ANNEXURES

¶75

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶76

OA-1077/2025

¶77

¶78

AW-1 Sri. Mallikarjuna Biradar, S/o. Siddappa, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶79

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶80

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Loan application dated 14.06.2012
A2	Appraisal memorandum-cum-sanction letter dated 14.06.2012
A3	Sanction letter dated 01.08.2012
A4	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 01.08.2012
A5	Guarantor’s letter dated 01.08.2012
A6	Mortgage deed dated 25.07.2012
A7	Loan application dated 08.05.2013
A8	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 17.06.2013
A9	Mortgage deed dated 11.06.2013
A10	Revival letter dated 15.07.2018
A11	Letter of revival dated 01.07.2021
A12	Letter of revival dated 005.06.2024
A13	Revival letter dated 13.07.2015
A14	Letter of revival dated 02.06.2017
A15	Revival letter dated 10.05.2019
A16	Letter of revival dated 09.05.2022
A17	Legal notice dated 16.01.2025
A18	Legal notice dated 16.01.2025
A19	Statement of account no. 4915326019112
A20	Statement of account no. 0491534011418
Witnes	s Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -
List of	Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶81

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶82

Sd/-

¶83

7 OA-1077/2025

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sumitrabai Sasabal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sumitrabai Sasabal and Others

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

Baby Assa Fathima versus Idbi Bank

State Bank of India versus Tirthamoyee Trading Co.

Idbi Bank versus Dalbir Kaur

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Davinder Singh

Amitesh Shah and Anrs versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited

Anilkumar Sasidharan aliasANILKUMAR Sy versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Companyu