Allowed

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Ramakant

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/2300/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the original application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against the defendant for an NPA agricultural loan account totaling Rs. 30.70 lakhs plus further interest at 6% simple p.a. The defendant appeared ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate drawn for Rs 30,70,328.80 plus interest at 6% simple p.a. from filing till realization. Proceedings against schedule properties and personal assets.

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Ramakant — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2300/2025

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank Branch office at: Desai Kallur Branch Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburgi District

¶6

Rep. by its Branch manager Sri. Nataraj Meeshi …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Ramakant S/o. Sri. Raghunatha Rao Kulakarni Aged about 70 years R/at: Gholanura village, Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburgi district – 585 301 ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : T S Mahabaleswara Defendant : Ex parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶13

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶14

OA-2300/2025

¶15

¶16

Rs 30,70,328.80/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Seventy Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty-Eight and Paisa Eighty 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

Crop loan of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of growing crops sugar cane.

¶19

ATL loan of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) for the purpose of lift irrigation for purchase of IP set, pipeline etc.

¶20

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 Registered mortgage deed.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 26.11.2025.

¶24

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-18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

OA-2300/2025

¶26

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶30

claim as against the defendant?

¶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 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

¶34

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

OA-2300/2025

¶39

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is

¶41

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).

¶42

In the result, OA.No.2300/2025 stands allowed,

¶43

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 30,70,328.80/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Seventy Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty-Eight and Paisa Eighty 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 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.

¶44

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

¶45

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶46

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

¶47

OA-2300/2025

¶48

¶49

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

¶50

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

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

¶52

terms of this final order.

¶53

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶54

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

¶55

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶56

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

¶57

the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of April, 2026].

¶58

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1 Amarnath Shetty, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶62

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶63

Exhibit	date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	19.01.2009	Loan Application
A2	19.01.2009	Loan Agreement
A3	10.01.2012	Revival Letter
A4	05.01.2015	Revival Letter
A5	10.11.2017	Revival Letter
A6	07.11.2020	Revival Letter

¶64

OA-2300/2025

¶65

¶66

A7	04.11.2023	Revival Letter
A8	02.08.2024	Copy of Legal Notice
A9	--------	Statement of account extract
A10	14.03.2011	Loan Sanction letter
A11	23.03.2011	Loan Agreement
A12	17.03.2014	Registered Mortgage Deed
A13	08.03.2017	Revival Letter
A14	18.02.2020	Revival Letter
A15	08.02.2023	Revival Letter
A16	19.04.2023	Revival Letter
A17	02.08.2024	Acknowledgment of Security/Liability
A18	---------	Statement of account extract along with bankers’certificate
Witness	Examined for	the Defendant: -Nil -

¶67

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Ramakant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Ramakant

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

Union Bank of India versus S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N