Allowed

State Bank of India v. Rayi Chandraiah

DRT16 Sept 2026OA/1343/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This仿佛是 an ex-parte hearing in a Debt Recovery Tribunal where the applicant bank sought a Recovery Certificate against defaulters for a housing loan of approximately Rs. 32.46 lakhs. With the respondents absent, the Tribunal found the documentary evidence admissible and sufficient to prove the loan, defaults, and admissibility within limitation. The key order reduced the interest rate to 8% simple interest despite the claimed rate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 32,45,874/- plus interest @ 8% p.a. (simple) from date of filing. Respondents jointly, severally and personally liable. Recovery to be effected against schedule property and other assets. Cost of proceedings allowed approved.

State Bank of India versus Rayi Chandraiah — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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 Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1343/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India SARB Bangalore, J.C. Road, Near Old Shivaji Theater, Opposite Trust Well Hospital Branch, Bangalore-560002. Represented by its Manager, Mr. Krishna K Rastogi.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Rayi Chandraiah S/o Late Sri Krishnaiah

¶10

Aged about 61 years,

¶11

Smt. Rayi Rajeshwari W/o Sri. Chandraiah Aged about 50 years Residing at: No.11, Sai Shakuntala Nilaya, Vasanth Layout , Munnekolalu, Marath halli, Bangalore-560037.

¶12

Also at:

¶13

(i) Site No. 145, 146, 147, 164, 165 and 166 Itina Layout, Jigani Village, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District-562106.

¶14

(ii) C/o Sri. Venkatswamy Reddy Itina Layout, Jigani Village,

¶15

2 1343/2024

¶16

Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District-562106.

¶17

...DEFENDANTS

¶18

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶19

Applicant : Sheela Deepak Defendants : Exparte

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

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. 32,45,874/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶22

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the Housing Loan -Term Loan credit facility of Rs. 41,50,000/- from the applicant bank on 30.12.2014.

¶23

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with Memorandum of Term Loan Agreement for Housing Loan, Absolute Sale Deed, Demand Notice.

¶24

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

¶25

3 1343/2024

¶26

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.

¶27

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 10.09.2026.

¶28

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-08 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

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

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by

¶35

the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove

¶36

4 1343/2024

¶37

availment of credit facility as stated in the OA, creation of Mortgage and

¶38

Hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim

¶39

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 was

¶43

availed for Housing purpose and also that the 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 8.00% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.1343/2024, stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶46

32,45,874/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing

¶47

OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally personally,

¶48

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 schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule

¶49

5 1343/2024

¶50

to the recovery certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for the amounts due

¶53

under the loan accounts.

¶54

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

¶55

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 order and

¶57

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms

¶59

of this final order.

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

Rules, 1993.

¶63

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

¶64

Sd/-

¶65

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶66

6 1343/2024

¶67

ANNEXURES

¶68

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Smt. Anusuya Ravi Shekar, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	13.03.2014	Loan Application
A2	30.12.2014	Arrangement Letter
A3	--	Memorandum of Loan Agreement
A4	30.12.27	Memorandum relating to deposit of Title Deeds
A5	10.04.2012	Sale Deed
A6	07.03.2018	Demand Notice
A7	23.08.2018	Possession Notice
A8	--	Account Extract -H.T.L.A/c 6416299147

¶72

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

¶73

-Nil -

¶74

-Nil –

¶75

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Rayi Chandraiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rayi Chandraiah

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.

Canara Bank versus Ninge Gowda

Thadiyampurath Hassan versus Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd. 1758

Suma Pradeep versus Federal Bank