Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Yeshwanthraya

DRT18 Mar 2026OA/174/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DTII allowed an OA filed under the RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against two defendants for agricultural loans totaling over Rs. 21 Lakhs. The bank proved loan availing, default, and mortgage deeds; defendants were absent. The court reduced the dispute rate interest to 6% simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 21,84,982.56 plus interest at 6% simple p.a. to be recovered from mortgaged properties and defendants' assets jointly and severally.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Yeshwanthraya — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 18^th Day of March, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.174/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Gramin bank Head office at: Box No. 55, 32, Sanganakkal Road, Gandhinagar, Ballari – 583 103

¶7

Branch office at: Aland Branch, Aland Taluk, Kalaburagi, Karnataka – 585 302 …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Yeshwantraya S/o. Sri. Laxman Rao Patil Aged about 39 years

¶10

Sri. Amrut Rao S/o. Laxman Rao Patil Aged about 40 years

¶11

Both are residing at: Teerth Village, Aland Taluk, Kalaburgi District, Karnataka – 585 302 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Smt. Velanganni C Defendants : Ex parte

OA-174/2025

FINAL ORDER

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. 21,84,982.56/- (Rupees Twenty-One Lakhs Eighty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Two and Paisa Fifty-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 are availed the following credit facilities:

¶19

KCC loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for the purpose of crop cultivation.

¶20

Agriculture term loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for the purpose land development.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with Simple mortgage deed.

¶22

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

¶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

OA-174/2025

¶25

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 18.11.2025.

¶27

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-16 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

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 facilities as stated in the OA,

¶34

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶35

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the

¶36

OA-174/2025

¶37

¶38

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶39

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

¶40

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is

¶43

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.174/2025 stands allowed,

¶45

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 21,84,982.56/- (Rupees Twenty-One Lakhs Eighty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Two and Paisa Fifty-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 personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶46

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

¶47

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such

¶48

OA-174/2025

¶49

¶50

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶51

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

terms of this final order.

¶57

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶58

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

¶59

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶60

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

¶61

the Open Court, this the 18^th Day of March, 2026].

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶64

ANNEXURES

¶65

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1 Sri. Parmeshwar, S/o. Sri. Siddappa Patale, Assistant Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

OA-174/2025

¶68

¶69

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶70

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	The original application form cum appraisal report for PKKCC dated 14.07.2015
A2	The original memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 14.07.2015
A3	The original simple mortgage deed for KCC/OD facility to agriculturists dated 14.07.2015
A4	The original letter of revival dated 20.03.2018
A5	The original letter of revival dated 30.04.2020
A6	The original letter of revival dated 16.01.2023
A7	The original application form cum appraisal report for agricultural term loan dated 12.03.2018
A8	The original loan sanction conveying letter dated 12.03.2018
A9	The original memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 12.03.2018
A10	The original pornote dated 12.03.2018
A11	The original simple mortgage deed dated 12.03.2018
A12	The original letter of revival dated 30.04.2020
A13	The original letter of revival dated 22.12.2022
A14	The original legal notice dated 06.09.2024
A15	Copy of the statement of account certified under bankers’ book of evidence act, showing the outstanding liability under KCC loan no. 41080354009819
A16	Copy of the statement of account certified under bankers’ book of evidence act, showing the outstanding liability under KCC loan no. 08015364003018
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶74

Sd/-

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Yeshwanthraya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Yeshwanthraya

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

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Smt. Jasbir Kaur

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Gurdev Singh (Deceased)

State Bank of India versus Jarnail Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Iqbal Singh

Union Bank of India versus Rahul Tantia

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/s. Gratia Leathers