Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Jayarathna

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/137/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the OA filed by Union Bank of India for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against four defendants for an agricultural loan default. Being an exparte proceeding, the applicant's evidence was accepted, and the claim was allowed with reduced interest at 6%.

What did the court decide?

Issued Recovery Certificate allowing recovery of Rs. 25,05,926/- plus 6% p.a. simple interest; respondents jointly and severally liable including against schedule property.

Union Bank of India versus Jayarathna — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of July, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.137/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India Channapatana Branch, No.2191/4-10, B.M. Road, Kuvempunagar, Channapatana Taluk, Ramanagar District-562 160 Represented by its Senior Manager, Mr. Ravi Ranjan.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mrs. Jayarathna W/o C.M. Manjunath Aged about 62 years, R/at Chikkamagaluru Village, Channapatana Taluk, Ramanagara Dist-562 160.

¶10

Mis. C.M. Sowmya D/o C.M. Manjunath Aged about 41 years, R/at Chikkamagaluru Village, Channapatana Taluk, Ramanagara Dist-562 160.

¶11

Mr. C.M. Santhosh S/o C.M. Manjunath Aged about 39 years, R/at Chikkamagaluru Village, Channapatana Taluk, Ramanagara Dist-562 160.

¶12

2 137/2023

¶13

Mr. C.M. Sukruth S/o C.M. Manjunath Aged about 36 years, R/at Chikkamagaluru Village, Channapatana Taluk, Ramanagara Dist-562 160. ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Shivashankar A Defendants : Exparte

¶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. 25,05,926/- (Rupees Twenty Five lakh Five Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Six 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 the Corp Hi-Tech Floriculture Loan credit facility of Rs. 36,00,000/- from the applicant bank on 24.02.2016.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Agreement for Term Loans, Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Undertaking, Common Deed of Hypothecation of Crops, Simple Mortgage Deed.

¶20

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility,

¶21

3 137/2023

¶22

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.

¶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

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 04.02.2025.

¶25

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-14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶29

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

¶33

4 137/2023

¶34

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 Mortgage and 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 of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

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

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural 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 6.00% (simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.137/2023, stands allowed,

¶38

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 25,05,926/- (Rupees Twenty Five lakh Five Hundred Nine hundred Twenty Six Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and

¶39

5 137/2023

¶40

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 schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶41

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally personally and their assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶46

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

¶47

of this final order.

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

Rules, 1993.

¶51

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the

¶52

Open Court, this the 31^st Day of July, 2026].

¶53

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶54

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶55

6 137/2023

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Arun Ramani, Senior Manager of the applicant Bank

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	24.02.2016	Loan Application submitted by defendant
A2	24.02.2016	Sanction Letter issued by Applicant
A3	24.02.2016	Agreement for Term Loan executed by 1^st& 2^nd Defendant
A4	24.02.2016	Demand Promissory Note
A5	24.02.2016	Take Delivery Letter to DPN executed by Defendant
A6	24.02.2016	Letter of Undertaking executed by Defendant in favour of Applicant Bank
A7	24.02.2016	Common Deed of hypothecation of Movable /Assets/ Debts submitted by the defendants
A8	24.02.2016	Common Deed of hypothecation of Crops/ Stocks executed by the defendants
A9	15.02.2016	Deed of Simple Mortgage executed by the all defendants
A10	15.02.2016	Deed of Simple Mortgage executed by the all defendants
A11	07.07.2018	Demand Promissory Note executed by the defendants
A12	07.07.2018	Take Delivery Letter to DPN executed by the defendants
A13	20.06.2022	Legal Notice issued by the applicant bank along with receipts

¶61

7 137/2023

¶62

A14 -- Certified Copy of the Statement of Account bearing No. 560931000160294

¶63

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil –

¶64

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Jayarathna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Jayarathna

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

Canara Bank versus Ms Kalka Packaging

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Fine Line Retails Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ramappa G Khanagoudar

Mrs Azaz Fatima versus Hero Housing Finance Limited

M/s Pannalal Associates versus Anand Rathi Global Finance Limited

Ranjana Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited