Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Padmavati

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/1296/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for a Recovery Certificate against two defendants who defaulted on an agricultural loan. Being absent, the defendants could not rebut the bank's evidence; the court granted the principal amount plus interest at 6% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs.43,58,986/- with interest at 6% p.a. granted against defendants jointly and severally, recoverable via schedule property.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Padmavati — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of August 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA No.1296/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameen Bank Chincholi Branch, Beside Kanakadurga Lodge, And Restaurant Chincholli Taluk, Kalburgi District-585307.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mrs. Padmavati

¶10

W/o.Vithal Rao Jahagirdar

¶11

Mr.Lakshmi Narayan

¶12

S/o.Vithal Rao Jahagirdar,

¶13

Both are Residing at:

¶14

Ranapur village, Chimncholi Taluk, Gulbarga, Kalaburagi District-585306 ...DEFENDANTS

¶15

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Sri.Prakasha Hegde.K Defendants : Exparte

¶17

2 OA No.1296/2025

¶18

: FINAL ORDER:

¶19

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.43,58,986/- (Rupees Forty-Three Lakhs Fifty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

The Defendants No.1 and 2 availed a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh Only) for the purpose of ATL-Farm Mechanization Loan.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage, hypothecation over the Schedule properties.

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

3 OA No.1296/2025

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 13.03.2026.

¶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 A1 to A15 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 defendants?

¶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 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest

¶33

4 OA No.1296/2025

¶34

as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶35

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for ATL- Farm Mechanization Loan purpose, and also that 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 6% p.a.(simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.1296/2025 stands allowed,

¶38

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.43,58,986/- (Rupees Forty-Three Lakhs Fifty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Six Only) along with current and future interest @ 6% from the date of filing the application till the date of realization, from the Defendants, jointly and severally after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶45

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

Rules, 1993.

¶49

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of August 2026].

¶50

6 OA No.1296/2025

¶51

ANNEXURES

¶52

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶53

AW-1: Sri.Senkadir.S.V, Branch Manager of the applicant bank.

¶54

Sl.	Description of Documents	Exhibits
No		Number
1.	Loan Application dated 22.01.2010	A1
2.	Sanction Letter dated 13.03.2010	A2
3.	Loan Agreement dated 17.03.3010	A3
4.	B-Extract of KA32TA 1758	A4
5.	Letter of Revival dated 12.03.2013	A5
6.	Letter of Revival dated 12.03.2013	A6
7.	Letter of Revival dated 05.03.2016	A7
8.	Letter of Revival dated 07.02.2019	A8
9.	Acknowledgement of Security /Liability from the Mortgagors dated 20.03.2021	A9
10.	Letter of Revival dated 20.03.2021	A10
11.	Letter of Revival dated 18.03.2024	A11
12.	Mortgage Deed dated 17.03.2010	A12
13.	Statement of Loan Account 74001097636 migrated A/c No.05915326021510	A13
14.	Legal Notice 15.10.2024	A14
15.	Postal Receipts	A15

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Padmavati

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Padmavati

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank