Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Lakshmaiah

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/1629/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an appeal remedy under Section 19 RDB Act 1993. The bank sought a Recovery Certificate for an agricultural loan defaulted by a deceased borrower. Defendants appeared ex parte and did not contest. The Tribunal found evidence admissible and proved the default, allowing the claim with interest reduced to 6% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs. 23,22,365/- plus 6% simple interest from the date of filing OA till realization, recoverable from the defendants' inherited estate or schedule property.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Lakshmaiah — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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 Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1629/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameena Bank Pavagada Branch, Opp. Municipal Office, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District

¶7

Represented by its Branch Manager

¶8

Mr. K M Joseph Kumar …APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Lakshmaiah

¶11

(Since, Deceased Rep LRs are 2 to 9)

¶12

Mr. Narayanappa S/o. late Sanjeevappa Aged about 53 years

¶13

Mr. Anjaneya S/o. late akkalappa Aged about 37 years

¶14

4.Mr. Obaiah S/o. late akkalappa

¶15

Aged about 36 years

¶16

5. Mrs. Lakshmidevamma

¶17

D/o. late Sanjeevappa Aged major

¶18

Mr. Sathish S/o. Lakshmaiah Aged major

¶19

OA-1629/2024

¶20

¶21

Mr. Naveenkumar V L S/o. Lakshmaiah Aged major

¶22

Mr. Maruthi N S/o. Narayanappa Aged major

¶23

Mr. Obanna N S/o. Narayanappa Aged major

¶24

All are R/at: Vaddarevu village, B K Halli Post, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District – 561 202 ...DEFENDANTS

¶25

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶26

Applicant : Prakasha Hegde K Defendant no. 1 : Deceased Defendants no. 2 to 9 : Ex parte

¶27

FINAL ORDER

¶28

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 23,22,365/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Twenty-Two Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty-Five Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶29

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant nos. 2 to 9

¶30

are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower Defendant no.1, who expired during the pendency of OA have availed a Crop Loan (under KCC) of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only).

¶31

OA-1629/2024

¶32

¶33

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the deceased borrower defendant no. 1 executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of simple mortgage deed over the schedule property.

¶34

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 accounts as NPA.

¶35

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.

¶36

Despite, service of summons on the defendants no. 2 to 9, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 23.10.2025.

¶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-05 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 proof affidavit.

¶39

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶40

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶41

OA-1629/2024

¶42

¶43

claim as against the defendants?

¶44

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶45

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶46

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶47

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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶48

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶49

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶50

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶51

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived

¶52

at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view

¶53

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

¶54

OA-1629/2024

¶55

¶56

In the result, OA.No.1629/2024 stands allowed,

¶57

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶58

23,22,365/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Twenty-Two Thousand Three Hundred and Sixty-Five Only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants, to the extent of their inheritance of any estate form the deceased borrower Defendant no.1, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA 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.

¶59

ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient to clean the liability

¶60

defendants are liable to the extent of estate, they inherited from

¶61

deceased defendant no. 1 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 order

¶65

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶66

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶67

OA-1629/2024

¶68

¶69

14. 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 DRT

¶71

(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

¶76

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶77

AW-1 Mr. Ravikumar S, S/o Shivamma S G, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶78

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶79

Exhibits	Documents
A1	Application form cum appraisal for KCC dated 25.02.2020
A2	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 29.02.2020
A3	Simple mortgage deed dated 25.02.2020
A4	Statement of account in loan account no. 12151130028796
A5	Legal notice dated 02.01.2024
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶80

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶81

-Nil -

¶82

Sd/-

¶83

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Lakshmaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Lakshmaiah

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.