Allowed

Bank of India v. Vishal Motors

DRT24 Feb 2026OA/1111/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for issuing a Recovery Certificate against partnership firm defendants and their partners for an unpaid cash credit facility of Rs. 25.24 Lakhs. Order reduced interest to 10% simple p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 25,24,344.78 plus 10% simple interest per annum, recoverable jointly, severally, and personally from defendants and against their assets.

Bank of India versus Vishal Motors — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of February, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1111/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Bank of India, Rajarajeshwari Nagar Branch, #127, 9^th Main Road, Ideal Homes Layout, Near Nimishamba Temple, Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bangalore- 560098.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Vishal Motors, Represented by its Authorized signatories, Sri. B. Vijay Jumar, Sri. V.K. Hari Babu, Sri. Srinu. B, Smt. K Dhanalakshmi, #5, 2^nd Main, Nayandahalli South Block, Near VMR Kalayanamantapa, Bangalore- 560039.

¶10

Sri. B. Vijay Kumar, S/o Sri. K. Bhaskar, Aged about 43 years, S-03, Hexagon Subhadra, 2^nd Floor, 1^st Main, Nayandahalli South Layout, Bengaluru- 560039.

¶11

Sri. V. K. Hari Babu, S/o V. Keshavanaidu, Aged about 41 years, Flat #1, Saikrishna Pradsie, 2^nd Cross, Naidu Layout, Arehalli, Bangalore- 560061.

¶12

Sri. Srinu. B, S/o Sri. Ramachandraiah, Aged about 35 years, #27/3, ITI Layout, Nnayandahalli, Bangalore- 560039.

¶13

OA 1111/2023

¶14

¶15

Smt. K Dhanalakshmi, W/o Sri. B. Vijay Kumar, Aged about 36 years, S-03, Hexagon Subhadra, 2^nd Floor, 1^st Main, Nayandahalli South layout, Bengaluru- 560039.

¶16

...DEFENDANTS

¶17

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶18

Applicant : Gowri Pradeep Defendants : Exparte

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

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 defendants for Rs. 25,24,344.78 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Four Thousand Three Hundred Forty Four and Paise Seventy Eight Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a partnership firm and defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are the partners availed cash credit facility of Rs. 25.00 lakhs.

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with on demand promissory note and hypothecation-cum-loan agreement.

¶23

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the

¶24

OA 1111/2023

¶25

¶26

defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default 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 balance amount due in the account.

¶28

Despite, summons on the defendants, they failed to appear resulting the defendants being set exparte on 16.10.2025.

¶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-14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶32

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶33

as against the defendants?

¶34

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶35

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶36

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by

¶37

the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put

¶38

OA 1111/2023

¶39

¶40

forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove

¶41

availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of Hypothecation and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶45

availed for Business 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 10.00% (simple).

¶46

In the result, OA.No.1111/2023, stands allowed,

¶47

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶48

25,24,344.78 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Four Thousand Three Hundred Forty Four and Paise Seventy Eight Only) with further interest @10.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from

¶49

the defendants jointly, severally & 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 defendants

¶50

OA 1111/2023

¶51

¶52

jointly, severally & personally and also proceeding against their assets

¶53

including the schedule assets. Schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶54

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶55

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

¶56

iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶57

iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶59

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

¶60

Rules, 1993.

¶61

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of February, 2026].

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Shashivardhana K K, Senior Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

OA 1111/2023

¶68

¶69

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶70

Exhibit Nos.	List of documents
A1	Loan application dated 01.10.2019
A2	Sanction letter dated 25.10.2019
A3	On demand promissory note (L-434) dated 25.10.2019 for Rs. 25.00 Lakhs executed by defendants
A4	Bearer letter dated 25.10.2019
A5	Draft declaration (L-515) dated 25.10.2019
A6	Composite document (L-516) dated 25.10.2019
A7	Hypothecation-cum-loan agreement (IFD-X) dated 25.10.2019, executed by defendants
A8	MCLR document dated 25.10.2019
A9	Acknowledgement of debt L444C dated 21.08.2021
A10	Legal notice dated 27.02.2023
A11	Postal receipts
A12	Acknowledgement
A13, A13(a) to A13(c)	Returned postal cover’s 4 in No’s
A14	Certified copy of the statement of accounts cash credit facility with certificate (A/c No. 846430110000019)

¶71

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

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

-Nil -

¶74

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of India v. Vishal Motors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Vishal Motors

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 versus Mr Mohammad Akram S/O Mohammad Quasam

Samiran Roy versus Bank of Baroda

State Bank of India versus Hetali Roshan Fernandes

Ms Tulsi Mineral Water versus State Bank of India

Ms Rehana Enterprise and Anr. versus Bank of Baroda

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Gunderao