Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Mallana

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/2389/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank seeking a recovery certificate against two defendants who defaulted on agricultural crop cultivation loans. After the defendants were set exparte, the court verified the evidence and liability, allowing the application but reducing the interest rate to 6% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs. 24,60,293.04 (principal) with further interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from 25.04.2025, executable against schedule properties.

Icici Bank Limited versus Mallana — 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.2389/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

M/s.ICICI Bank Limited 1^st Floor, DSMG 4/10, Mythree Tower, Bommanahalli Hosur Main Road, Bangalore-560068.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Mallana Gouda

¶10

S/o.Yakanagouda, R/at: # 24, Hanumantha Temple, Tuggaladini Maski, Manvi,

¶11

Raichur-584123.

¶12

Mrs.Shankramma W/o.Mallanna Gouda R/at: # 24, Hanumantha Temple, Tuggaladinni Maski, Manvi, Raichur-584123. ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : SBM Associates Defendant : Exparte

¶15

2 OA No.2389/2025

¶16

: FINAL ORDER:

¶17

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.24,60,293.04/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Ninety-Three and Paisa Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

The Defendant No.1 availed a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only) for the purpose of Crop Cultivation. Defendant No.2 as coapplicant.

¶19

The Defendant No.1 again availed a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakhs Only) for the purpose of Crop Cultivation. Defendant No.2 as co-applicant under Kisan Credit Card (KCC)

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents, being owner of the schedule property. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage, hypothecation over the Schedule properties

¶21

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

¶22

3 OA No.2389/2025

¶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

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 20.04.2026.

¶25

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A11 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

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

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest

¶32

4 OA No.2389/2025

¶33

as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶34

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶35

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural purpose and also that 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% p.a.(simple).

¶36

In the result, OA.No.2389/2025 stands allowed,

¶37

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.24,60,293.04/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Ninety-Three and Paisa Four Only) with further interest @ 6% (simple) p.a as on 25.04.2025 from the defendants after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, in the loan account and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding the schedule properties. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

other assets are liable for all such amounts due in loan account.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶45

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with

¶46

this Final Order.

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

Rules, 1993.

¶50

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

¶51

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶52

6 OA No.2389/2025

¶53

ANNEXURES

¶54

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶55

AW-1: Sri.Harish E, Manager of the applicant bank.

¶56

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶57

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1.	Loan Application from dated 09.06.2025	A1
2.	Sanction Letter dated 24.06.2016	A2
3.	Hypothecation Deed dated 09.06.2016	A3
4.	Loan Application form dated 13.06.2017	A4
5.	Sanction Letter dated 21.07.2017	A5
6.	Hypothecation Deed dated 13.06.2017	A6
7.	Mortgage to Record of Equitable Mortgage by Deposition of Title Deeds dated 26.07.2016	A7
8.	Supplemental Indenture of Mortgage dated 26.07.2017	A8
9.	Legal Notice dated 13.06.2025	A9
10.	Postal Receipts	A10
11.	Statement of Accounts No.044551000977	A11

¶58

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Mallana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Mallana

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