Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Mrs Ambika

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/1282/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application under Section 19 RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. Despite the defendant's ex parte absence, the Tribunal found the loan documents and default evidence sufficient. However, interest was reduced to 10% p.a. while allowing recovery of the principal and costs.

What did the court decide?

The OA is allowed; Recovery Certificate for Rs.51,40,385.41 plus 10% pa simple interest from filing date until realization to be drawn and executed against the defendant and her assets.

Punjab National Bank versus Mrs Ambika — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.1282/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Punjab National Bank Banashankari Branch No.21, Vokkaligara Sangha Pharmacy College Building, 24^th Main, Banashankari, 2^nd Stage, Bangalore-560070 Respresented By Its Senior Manager

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mrs. Ambika W/O Harish Kumar Prop. M/S H M Ventures Having Address At No. 1811, 1^st Floor, 50 Feet Road, ICICI Bank, Kumar Swamy Layout, 2^nd Stage, Bangalore-560078

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Vignesh Shetty Defendant : Exparte

OA 1282/2022

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶17

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.51,40,385.41/- (Rupees Fifty One Lakhs Forty Thousand Three Eighty Five and Paise Forty One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed an business loan.

¶19

I. Term loan of a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Only),

¶20

II. Term loan of a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Only),

¶21

III. Cash credit of a sum of rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only).

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with Sanction Letter, Agreement Of Term Loan and Agreement Of Hypothecation.

¶23

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing

¶24

OA 1282/2022

¶25

¶26

the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults 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 amount due in the account.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 04.12.2025.

¶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-09 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 the proof affidavit.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶32

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

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

OA 1282/2022

¶36

¶37

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 as stated in the OA, creation of mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

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

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶40

are availed by defendant for Business purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this

¶41

Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest

¶42

@10% p.a. (Simple). For all availed credit facilities

¶43

In the result, OA.No.1282/2022, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶45

OA 1282/2022

¶46

¶47

sum of Rs.51,40,385.41/- (Rupees Fifty One Lakhs Forty Thousand Three Eighty Five and Paise Forty One Only) with further interest @10% 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 proceedings against defendant personally and her other assets.

¶48

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

in terms of this final order.

¶53

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶54

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

¶55

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶56

[Dictated to the Stenographer (ms), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30th day of June, 2026].

¶57

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 1282/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: M Sreenivasa Rao, Chief Manager, of the Applicant Bank.

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
A1	Letter dated 16.05.2018 issued by defendant no. 1 stating that he carries business as proprietary in the name of HM venture.
A2	Sanction letter dated 10.02.2017
A3	Agreement of term loan dated 15.02.2017
A4	Letter of undertaking dated 15.02.2017
A5	Common agreement dated 15.02.2017
A6	Sanction letter dated 15.05.2018
A7	Agreement of term loan dated 16.05.2018
A8	Agreement of hypothecation of asset dated 16.052018
A9	Common agreement dated 16.05.2018
Witness	Examined for the Defendants:	-Nil -

¶65

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶66

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Punjab National Bank v. Mrs Ambika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Mrs Ambika

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Anugya Enterprises

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/s Maa Sharde Agritech

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Balajee Coal Depot

Manoj Kumar Sharma versus Punjab National Bank

Sri Ram Bhagat Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Niraj Marble and Tiles and Ors.