Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Narasimhappa

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/1630/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate under Section 19 of the RDB Act against four.defaulting borrowers in absentia. Evidence of loans and defaults was uncontroverted. The Tribunal awarded recovery with reduced interest at 6% p.a. simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 32,31,357.30 with interest at 6% p.a. simple; execution against schedule property and personal assets; costs awarded.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Narasimhappa — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of January, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1630/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameena Bank, Pavagada Branch, Opposite Muncipal Office, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District, Represented by its Branch Manager, Mr. K.M. Joseph Kumar, S/o Jojappa Kodliganti, Aged about 36 years, Branch Manager.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Narasimhappa, S/o Bodappa, Aged about 75 years.

¶10

Mr. Narendra Yadav, S/o Narashimhappa, Aged about 32 years.

¶11

Mr. Obaiah, S/o Narasimhappa, Aged about 45 years.

¶12

Mr. Navaputra N, S/o Narasimhappa, Aged about 35 years,

¶13

All are R/at. Vaddarevu Village, B K Halli Post, Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District- 561202.

...DEFENDANTS

OA 1630/2024

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶18

Applicant : Prakasha Hedge K 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 against the defendants for Rs. 32,31,357.30 (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Seven and Paise Thirty Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed KCC loan of Rs. 26,76,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakh Seventy Six Thousand Only) and agricultural crop loan of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakh Only). 3. It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans and simple mortgage deed.

¶22

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

OA 1630/2024

due in the account.

Despite, summons the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 18.02.2025 & 20.01.2026.

¶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-10 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

¶32

as against the defendants?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains 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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the

¶36

OA 1630/2024

¶37

¶38

defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above

¶39

documents. The claim 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 facilities are

¶43

availed for Agriculture 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).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.1630/2024, stands allowed,

¶45

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

¶46

32,31,357.30 (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Seven and Paise Thirty Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & 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. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

OA 1630/2024

¶49

¶50

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly,

¶51

severally & personally and their assets are liable for the respective amounts due under the respective loan accounts.

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

of this final order.

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

Rules, 1993.

¶60

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

¶61

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶62

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

ANNEXURES

¶64

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Ravikumar S E, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶66

OA 1630/2024

¶67

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Application from cum appraisal for KCC dated 08.01.2021
A2	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 21.01.2021
A3	Application form cum appraisal report for agricultural dated 21.01.2021
A4	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 21.01.2021
A5	Simple mortgage deed dated 08.01.2021
A6	Simple mortgage deed dated 08.01.2021
A7	Statement of account in loan account No. 12151130032179
A8	Statement of account in loan account No. 42151364003021
A9	Legal Notice dated 20.06.2024
A10	Postal receipts

¶70

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

¶71

-Nil -

¶72

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Narasimhappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Narasimhappa

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

S Rajeswari versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Kishan Mitrapal Chawla Dairy

Bank of India versus Ms Narmada Pipes

Ms Khajuria Constructions and Another versus State Bank of India

Raj Kumar Baniya versus State Bank of India

Smt Firoja Begum versus Indian Bank