Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Mr Ranganath S a

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/1194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for an unsecured vehicle loan. Since defendants appeared ex parte, evidence was uncontroverted. Tribunal allowed the claim but reduced interest to 7% simple per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 25,62,445/- with 7% simple interest from the date of filing, recoverable jointly, severally and personally from defendants and their hypothecated vehicle.

Bank of Baroda versus Mr Ranganath S a — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1194/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Bank of Baroda Dayanandasagar College of Eng. Branch, Shivage Malleshwara Hills, 91^st Main Road, 1^st Stage,Kumara Swamy Layout, Bengaluru – 560 078

¶6

Through its Branch Manager Smt. Sudha Gopalakrishnan …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Ranganath S A Aged about 37 years R/o. 8B, 1103, Provident Sunworth, Doddabele Kengeri, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560 060

¶9

And also, at: No. 122, 1^st and 2^nd main, AK colony, Bangalore – 560 029

¶10

Mrs. Bhagyashree W/o. S A Ranganath Aged about 23 years R/o. 8B, 1103, Provident Sunworth, Doddabele Kengeri, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560 060

¶11

OA-1194/2022

¶12

¶13

And also, at: No. 122, 1^st and 2^nd main, AK colony, Bangalore – 560 029 ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : VS Associates Defendants : Ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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. 25,62,445/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Sixty-Two Thousand Four Hundred and Forty-Five Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed Vehicle loan of Rs. 23,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) on 09.08.2019.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

OA-1194/2022

¶22

¶23

repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶24

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.

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 28.11.2025.

¶26

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-7 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

¶30

claim as against the defendants?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶34

unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The

¶35

evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the OA,

¶36

OA-1194/2022

¶37

¶38

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are 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

¶43

that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 7.00% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.1194/2022 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶46

Rs. 25,62,445/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Sixty-Two Thousand

¶47

Four Hundred and Forty-Five Only) with further interest @7% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA

¶48

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets including the hypothecated vehicle the loan accounts.

¶49

OA-1194/2022

¶50

¶51

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶52

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

¶53

receipt of the order.

¶54

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

¶55

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

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

¶57

terms of this final order.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶59

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

¶60

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶61

[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 March, 2026]

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

(T. RAJESH)

¶64

PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-1194/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Naresh B Shetty, S/o. Late P Balakrishna Shetty, Assistant

¶70

Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶71

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶72

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Sanction letter dated 09.08.2019
A2	Loan agreement (instrument of hypothecation of vehicle) dated 09.08.2019 along with B-register extract issued by government of Karnataka,Transport department.
A3	Declaration cum undertaking letter dated 09.08.2019
A4	Guarantee agreement dated 09.08.2019
A5	Demand promissory note dated 09.08.2019
A6	Demand notice dated 02.11.2020/02.04.2021
A7	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant’s loan account no. 74370600000445

¶73

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

¶74

-Nil -

¶75

Sd/-

¶76

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Mr Ranganath S a

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Mr Ranganath S a

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

State Bank of India versus Rajendrakumar Jain

Inno Infra Pvt. Ltd. and 9 Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajdeepsinh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Jaswinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Bandhav Filling Centre