Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Hanumappa

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/2386/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application under Section 19 of the RDB Act filed by ICICI Bank against two defendants for default in Farmer Financing Loan. The Tribunal allowed recovery of principal amount with reduced simple interest at 6% per annum and directed issuance of Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of aggregate sum of Rs. 22,58,879.80 with interest at 6% p.a. simple from date of filing; issuance of Recovery Certificate for execution.

Icici Bank Limited versus Hanumappa — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of July, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.2386/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

M/s ICICI Bank Limited 1^st Floor, DSMG 4/10 , Mythree Tower, Bommanahalli Hosur, Main Road, Bangalore-56 068. Represented by its Authorized Officer.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Hanumappa PYatheppa Aged about 53 years, S/o Pyatheppa, R/at. #75, Miyyapur, NA, Devadurga, Raichur-584 126.

¶10

MRs. Renuka Aged about 54 years W/o Hanumappa Pyatheppa R/at. #75, Miyyapur, NA, Devadurga, Raichur-584 126.

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Anand Muttalli Defendants : Exparte

¶14

2 2386/2025

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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. 22,58,879.80/(Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Fifty Eight Thousand Eight hundred Seventy Nine and Paise 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 defendants availed the Farmer Financing Loan credit facility of Rs. 19,00,000/- under the Kisan credit Card from the applicant bank on 11.01.2023.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with General Power of Attorney, Hypothecation Deed, Mortgage Deed.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 20.04.2026.

¶22

3 2386/2025

¶23

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-7 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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.

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶26

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

¶27

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶28

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶29

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 Mortgage and hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶30

4 2386/2025

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for crop cultivation 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 8.00% (simple).

¶34

In the result, OA.No.2386/2025, stands allowed,

¶35

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 22,58,879.80/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Fifty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Nine and paise Eighty 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 amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶36

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶37

5 2386/2025

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶42

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

¶43

of this final order.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Rules, 1993.

¶47

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of July, 2026].

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

(T. RAJESH)

¶50

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶51

ANNEXURES

¶52

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶53

AW-1: Harish E, Authorized Officer of the applicant Bank

¶54

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶55

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	06.01.2023	Loan Application
A2	11.01.2023	Sanction Letter
A3	06.01.2023	Hypothecation Deed

¶56

6 2386/2025

¶57

A4	13.02.2023	Mortgage to record of Equitable Mortgage by
		deposition of Title Deeds
A5	11.11.2024	Legal Notice
A6	--	Postal Receipts
A7	--	Statement of Account No. 383851000459

¶58

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

¶59

-Nil -

¶60

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶61

PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Hanumappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Hanumappa

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

Canara Bank versus Ms Kalka Packaging

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Fine Line Retails Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ramappa G Khanagoudar

Mrs Azaz Fatima versus Hero Housing Finance Limited

M/s Pannalal Associates versus Anand Rathi Global Finance Limited

Ranjana Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited