Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aneev Industries

DRT29 May 2026OA/1554/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's recovery application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act due to defendants' default on term loans. With the case heard ex-parte, the Court granted a recovery certificate for the principal amount plus interest capped at 12% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate granted for Rs. 1,08,60,375.65 plus 12% p.a. simple interest from filing date until realization, recoverable from defendants jointly, severally, and personally, and through procee

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Aneev Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of May, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1554/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Bank of Baroda Kundapur Branch Next to Sai Center, Kundapura, Udupi District Karnataka- 576201

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s Aneev Industries Prop. Sri. Prasanna Shetty Sy. No.12/10, Main Road, Halady Vellage, Udupi District, Karnataka- 576222

¶10

Sri. Prasanna Shetty S/o Rajeev Shetty H.No.9-7-603, Ward No.24, Prashanth Colony, Behind Laxmi Theatre Koppal, Karnataka-583231

¶11

Also at: Pavithra Nilaya, Near Z P H P School, Kavadi Village and Post, Udupi District, Karnataka- 576225

¶12

Sri. Vasantha Shetty S/o. Chandayya Shetty H.No-1-265, Bhavani Nilaya, Nagar Matad Mane, Nadubettu,

¶13

OA 1554/2023

¶14

¶15

Salvadi Village, Kundapur Taluk, Udupi District, Karnataka-576222

¶16

Sri. Harish Hegde S/o. Panduranga Hegde, H.No.2-12, Koikadi House, 28, Halady, Kundapur Taluk, Udupi District, Karnataka-576222 ...DEFENDANTS

¶17

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶18

Applicant : VS Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

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 for Rs.1,08,60,375.65 (Rupees one crore eight lakh sixty thousand three hundred seventy five and paisa sixty five only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a Proprietary concern with defendant No.2 as its Proprietor availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶22

I. Term Loan of a sum of Rs.27,00,000/- (Rupees twenty seven Lakh Only),

¶23

OA 1554/2023

¶24

¶25

II. Term loan limit of Rs.68,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Eight lakh Only),

¶26

III. Term Loan limit of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only),

¶27

IV. Term Loan limit of Rs.5,65,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh sixty five thousand Only),

¶28

V. Term Loan limit of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh Only) and

¶29

VI. Term Loan limit of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Only).

¶30

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with hypothecation agreement, demand promissory note, guarantee agreement in favor of the applicant bank.

¶31

It is further contended that, the defendants despite availing 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.

¶32

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate

¶33

OA 1554/2023

¶34

¶35

for the amount due in the account.

¶36

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 27.01.2025.

¶37

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-39 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶38

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.

¶39

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶40

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

¶41

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶42

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶43

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶44

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶45

OA 1554/2023

¶46

¶47

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 defendants and the claim as the amount due

¶48

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

¶49

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶50

this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶51

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶52

are availed by defendants for Term loan and working capital

¶53

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 @12% p.a. (Simple).

¶54

In the result, OA.No.1554/2023, stands allowed,

¶55

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶56

OA 1554/2023

¶57

¶58

sum of Rs.1,08,60,375.65 (Rupees one crore eight lakh sixty thousand three hundred seventy five and paisa sixty five only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple),

¶59

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 and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶60

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants

¶61

jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶62

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶63

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

¶64

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

¶65

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶66

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

¶67

in terms of this final order.

¶68

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶69

OA 1554/2023

¶70

¶71

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶72

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th day of May, 2026].

¶73

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶74

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶75

ANNEXURES

¶76

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶77

AW-1: S. Kanaga Rathinam, Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶78

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶79

The documents are appended in this order.

¶80

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

¶81

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aneev Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ms Aneev Industries

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

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Aby Abraham

RRaju Kalidoss versus Canara Bank

Sajan S versus Yes Bank

Vinod Kumar Gupta versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Marvel Metals Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Mr B S Girisha versus Dcb Bank Limited