Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. M. Basavanna

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/189/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA No.189/2025, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate against a defendant who failed to appear. The court reduced the statutory interest rate to 6% per annum simple for agricultural loans and directed recovery from the defendant's assets.

What did the court decide?

Issue of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 26,79,753/- with interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing, recoverable from the defendant personally and from schedule properties.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus M. Basavanna — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 27^th Day of March, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶5

OA.No.189/2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Karnataka Grameena Bank Head office at: Gandhinagar, Ballari, Karnataka – 583 103 Branch office at: HD Kote Branch, H B Road, HD Kote Town, HD Kote Taluk, Mysore District – 571 114

¶8

Represetend by Manager Mr. Harshan H N …APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. M Basavanna S/o. Muddappa Aged about 55 years R/o. Jakkahalli Village, HD Kote Taluk, Mysore District – 571 114 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Naveen Tao Defendant : Ex parte

OA-189/2025

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 defendant for Rs. 26,79,753/- (Rupees Twenty-Six Lakhs Seventy-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty-Three Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed the following credit facilities:

¶18

Kisan credit card of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for agricultural purpose.

¶19

Agriculture term loan of Rs. 1,65,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Sixty-Five Thousand Only) for agricultural purpose.

¶20

Agricultural term loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for construction of cow shed.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan document along with hypothecation agreement.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant 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

¶24

OA-189/2025

¶25

¶26

the amount due in the account.

¶27

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 27.11.2025.

¶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-28 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

¶32

claim as against the defendant?

¶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 defendant 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, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶36

OA-189/2025

¶37

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is 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

¶41

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

¶42

In the result, OA.No.189/2025 stands allowed,

¶43

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 26,79,753/- (Rupees Twenty-Six Lakhs Seventy-Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty-Three Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered

¶44

and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to

¶45

be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶46

OA-189/2025

¶47

¶48

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

¶49

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant

¶50

personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under

¶51

the loan accounts.

¶52

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of

¶53

receipt of the order.

¶54

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

¶55

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

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

¶57

terms of this final order.

¶58

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in 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 27^th Day of March, 2026].

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-189/2025

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶68

AW-1 Mr. Harshan H N, S/o. Nagaraju K, Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶69

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶70

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	12.01.2009	Application form agricultural/development loan
A2	16.01.2009	Declaration letter mortgaging the immovable properties for the loan availed
A3	17.01.2009	Hypothecation agreement
A4	17.01.2009	Terms and condition of crop loan agreement under KCC
A5	08.12.2022	Agreement to repay time barred debts
A6	02.11.2023	Letter of revival
A7	15.01.2009	Application for agricultural loan
A8	06.02.2009	Declaration letter mortgaging the immovable properties for the loan availed
A9	07.02.2009	Hypothecation agreement
A10	07.02.2009	Terms and condition and sanction letter
A11	08.12.2020	Agreement to repay time barred debts
A12	02.11.2023	Letter of revival
A13	25.04.2009	Application for agricultural loan
A14	22.06.2009	Advance sanction communication
A15	25.06.2009	Declaration letter mortgaging the immovable properties for the loan availed
A16	30.06.2009	Hypothecation agreement
A17	30.06.2009	Terms and condition of crop loan agreement under KCC
A18	14.01.2012	Letter of commitment
A19	10.01.2015	Letter of commitment
A20	01.01.2018	Letter of commitment

¶71

OA-189/2025

¶72

¶73

A21	30.03.2019	Letter of commitment
A22	08.12.2020	Agreement to repay time barred debts
A23	02.11.2023	Letter of revival
A24	12.09.2024	Legal notice along with postal receipt
A25	------	One postal cover returned unserved
A26	------	Bank statement a/c no. (42042354010813)
A27	------	Bank statement a/c no. (42042326000109)
A28	------	Bank statement a/c no. (42042326000809)

¶74

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

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH)

PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. M. Basavanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. M. Basavanna

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

State Bank of India versus Rajendrakumar Jain

Inno Infra Pvt. Ltd. and 9 Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajdeepsinh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Jaswinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Bandhav Filling Centre