Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Rangayya and Others

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/1616/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against legal heirs of a deceased borrower. Despite defaults in repaying an agricultural loan, the defendants failed to appear. The Tribunal awarded the principal amount with reduced interest at 6% p.a. due to agricultural purpose.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate drawn for Rs. 55,36,118/- with further interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from filing date till realization against the schedule property.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Rangayya and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1616/2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Karnataka Grameena Bank Branch office at: Deodurga, Deodurga Taluk, Raichur District

¶8

Represented by its Branch Manager

¶9

Hemant Kumar Chauhan …APPLICANT

¶10

AND:

¶11

Sri. Rangayya

¶12

(Since Deceased, Rep: by his LRs)

¶13

1(a) Smt. Uttamma Alias Muttamma

¶14

W/o. Sri. Rangayya

¶15

Aged about 59 years

¶16

R/at: Halladarayanadoddi, Deodurga Taluk,

¶17

Raichur district – 584 111

¶18

1(b) Sri. Siddayya

¶19

S/o. late Rangayya

¶20

Aged about 34 years

¶21

R/at: Halladarayanadoddi, Deodurga Taluk,

¶22

Raichur district – 584 111

¶23

1(c) Tayamma

¶24

D/o. late Rangayya Aged about 23 years

¶25

R/at: Halladarayanadoddi, Deodurga Taluk,

¶26

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶27

¶28

Raichur district – 584 111

¶29

2. Sri. Sabaiah

¶30

S/o. Sri. Masalayya Aged about 70 years R/at: Halladarayanadoddi, Deodurga Taluk, Raichur district – 584 111 ...DEFENDANTS

¶31

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Sri. T P Muthanna Defendant no.1 : Deceased Defendant no.1 (a, b & C) & 2 : Ex parte

¶32

FINAL ORDER

¶33

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. 55,36,118/- (Rupees Fifty-Five Lakhs Thirty-Six Thousand One Hundred and Eighteen Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶34

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant nos. 1(a, b & c) are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower. The Late borrower Sri. Rangayya. availed a Farm Mechanization loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for purchase of tractor, trailer and accessories.

¶35

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶36

¶37

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the deceased borrower Sri. Rangayya executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of deposit of title deeds over the schedule property.

¶38

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 defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶39

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.

¶40

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 01.04.2026.

¶41

The applicant let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A13 and got the same marked in evidence. 8. 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.

¶42

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶43

¶44

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶45

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

¶46

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶47

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶48

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. 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 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.

¶49

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.

¶50

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are

¶51

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is

¶52

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶53

¶54

arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal

¶55

is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶56

In the result, OA.No.1616/2025 stands allowed,

¶57

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum

¶58

of Rs. 55,36,118/- (Rupees Fifty-Five Lakhs Thirty-Six Thousand

¶59

One Hundred and Eighteen Only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant nos. 1(a, b & C) to the extent of their inheritance of any estate of deceased borrower Sri. Rangayya, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶60

ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient to clean the liability defendant nos. 1 (a, b & C) are liable to the extent of estate they inherited from deceased Sri. Rangayya for the balance amount.

¶61

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶62

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

¶63

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶64

¶65

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

¶66

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶67

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

¶68

with this Final Order.

¶69

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶70

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

¶71

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶72

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30^th Day of June, 2026].

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶75

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶76

AW-1 Venkatarama Sharhapur, S/o. N P Sharhapur, Manager of the applicant bank.

¶77

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶78

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶79

-Nil -

¶80

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Copy Of the Application for Agricultural Credit-Farm Mechanization Loan Dated 08.02.2005
A2	Copy of the FML sanction memorandum dated 11.02.2005
A3	Copy Of Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans Dated 16.02.2005
A4	Copy of the letter evidencing deposit of title deeds dated 16.02.2005
A5	Copyof the letter of revival dated 20.01.2008

¶81

OA. No. 1616/2025

¶82

¶83

A6	Copyof the letter of revival dated 08.12.2010
A7	Copyof the letter of revival dated 23.10.2013
A8	Copyof the letter of revival dated 11.11.2015
A9	Copyof the letter of revival dated 01.10.2018
A10	Copy of the letter of revival dated 01.09.2021 by legal heir
A11	Copy of the acknowledgement of security/liability dated 03.08.2015
A12	Copyof the legal notice dated 19.12.2022
A13	Copy of the statement of account certified under bankers’ book of evidence act in respect of FML account no. 59115325003304
List of Do	cuments Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶84

Sd/-

¶85

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Rangayya and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Rangayya and Others

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.