Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Narendra Babu B K

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/1169/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for issuance of a recovery certificate against a defendant who defaulted on a vehicle loan. Finding the defendant ex parte, the court confirmed the debt liability but reduced the permitted interest rate to 7% simple.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 73,41,183.03 with reduced interest at 7% p.a. (simple) against the defendant personally and schedule properties.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Narendra Babu B K — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1169/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd Head office at: Erode, Karur Branch office at: J C Road, Ashraff Commercial Complex, JC Road, Bangalore – 560 002

¶6

Through its senior Branch Head

¶7

Mr. Ananth Krishna A …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Narendra Baby B K S/o. Krishnappa S Aged about 52 years

¶10

Having address at: #687,9^th Cross, Bagalagunte, Bangalore – 560 073 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Thejas Rai K Defendant : Ex parte

OA-1169/2023

FINAL ORDER

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. 73,41,183.03/- (Rupees Seventy-Three Lakhs Forty-One Thousand One Hundred and Eighty-Three and Paisa Three 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 KVB Transport Plus SRTO loan of Rs. 41,00,000/- (Rupees Forty-One Lakhs Only) for purchase of vehicle for business purpose.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents.

¶19

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

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 04.07.2025.

¶22

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof

¶23

Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced

¶24

OA-1169/2023

¶25

¶26

Exhibits A-1 to A-10 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

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

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶33

unrebutted as defendant 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

OA-1169/2023

¶39

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are

¶41

availed for Vehicle purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 7.00% (simple).

¶42

In the result, OA.No.1169/2023 stands allowed,

¶43

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 73,41,183.03/(Rupees Seventy-Three Lakhs Forty-One Thousand One Hundred and Eighty-Three and Paisa Three Only) with further interest @7% 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.

¶44

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

¶45

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶46

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.

¶47

OA-1169/2023

¶48

¶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, stands disposed of in

¶52

terms of this 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 the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of April, 2026]

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

(T. RAJESH)

¶59

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: Raghavender K, S/o. Rukmapathi, Branch Manager, of Applicant

¶63

Bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Loan application 01.08.2016
A2	Sanction letter dated 05.08.2016
A3	Hypothecation of motor vehicle agreement dated 05.08.2016
A4	Demand promissory note dated 05.08.2016
A5	Letter of undertaking dated 05.08.2016

¶66

OA-1169/2023

¶67

¶68

A6	Letter dated 05.08.2016 to the applicant by defendant giving right to seize the hypothecated vehicle
A7	Letter of authority dated 05.08.2016 authorizing the applicant to make payment to the suppliers at the instance of and/or on behalf of the defendant
A8	Revival letter dated 24.05.2021
A9	Recall notice dated 13.01.2023
A10	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant’s loan accounts
Witness E	xamined for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶69

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶70

Sd/-

¶71

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karur Vysya Bank v. Narendra Babu B K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Narendra Babu B K

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 S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N