Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Ms Vejaya Lakshmi Fertilizer and Minerals

DRT16 Sept 2026OA/116/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Bank of Maharashtra against two defendants for recovery of dues amounting to Rs.74,10,858/-. As the defendants defaulted and appeared ex parte, the Tribunal found the evidence sufficient to prove the loan facility, security interests, and defaults. The Tribunal allowed the claim with reduced interest at 10% p.a. and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate executable against joint and several liability and schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.74,10,858/ with 10% p.a. simple interest; recoverable jointly, severally, personally, and against schedule property.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ms Vejaya Lakshmi Fertilizer and… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 16^th Day of September, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.116/2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Bank of Maharashtra Branch office at: Jailaxmipuram Branch, No.148, Jayilaxmipuram, Kalidasa Road, Mysore District-570017 Rep. by its Senior Manager … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Vejaya Lakshmi Fertilizer and Minerals Proprietorship firm Rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Prem Kumar S A Office at: Sy.No.155/4, Gungral Chatra village, Yelwala Hobli, Mysore District-571130

¶10

Mr. Prem Kumar S A Proprietor of Defendant No.1 firm S/o. Appaji Age: Major Residing at: No.5467, 3^rd Cross, 8^th Main Road, Dattagalli, Kanakadasanagar, Mysore District-570022 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M/s. M V Kini & Co., Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.116/2025

: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.74,10,858/- (Rupees Seventy Four Lakh Ten Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed cash credit facility of Rs.70,00,000/- on 11.04.2023.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents.

¶19

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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 account as NPA.

¶20

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.

¶21

OA. No.116/2025

¶22

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 06.01.2026.

¶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 A1 to A11 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 defendants?

¶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

¶31

remains unrebutted as defendants 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

¶32

as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the

¶33

OA. No.116/2025

¶34

¶35

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The

¶36

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

¶38

within the limitation.

¶39

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶40

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

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶42

was availed for business purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view

¶43

of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 10.00%

¶44

p.a.(simple).

¶45

In the result, OA.No.116/2025 stands allowed,

¶46

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶47

of Rs.74,10,858/- (Rupees Seventy Four Lakh Ten Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Eight only) with further interest of 10.00% p.a.(simple) from the 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 and allowed the same to

¶48

be recovered by proceeding against defendants jointly, severally

¶49

OA. No.116/2025

¶50

¶51

and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶52

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

¶53

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

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

¶59

with this Final Order.

¶60

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶61

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

¶62

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 16^th Day of September 2026].

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.116/2025

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Mr. Manoj PSKS, Branch Manager of the applicant bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1	Loan application	A1
2	Sanction letter	A2
3	Memorandum of record for additional equitable mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds	A3
4	Request letter for making credit facility	A4
5	Demand promissory note	A5
6	Letter of Proprietorship	A6
7	Deed of hypothecation	A7
8	Letter of undertaking	A8
9	Letter of set off	A9
10	Demand notice	A10
11	Statement of account	A11

Bank of Maharashtra v. Ms Vejaya Lakshmi Fertilizer and Minerals

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Ms Vejaya Lakshmi Fertilizer and Minerals

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

Uco Bank versus Dilip

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Ibrahim Fish Traders Traders and Ors.

State Bank of India versus Gaurav Kumar and Ors.

M S Arsh Enterprises versus State Bank of India

Alok Das versus Icici Bank Limited

Canara Bank versus K T Ramesh