Allowed

State Bank of India v. Muni Royal

DRT28 Apr 2026OA/24/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal considered an Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against a borrower who defaulted on term loans and cash credit. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal found the claim admissible, reduced interest to 12% per annum, and ordered recovery from personal assets and secured properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued against defendant for Rs. 25,59,297/- with further simple interest at 12% p.a. from filing date; executable against personal and secured assets.

State Bank of India versus Muni Royal — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 28^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.24/2025

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India Branch office at: 11/90, 3^rd floor, JC road, Bengaluru – 560 002

¶6

Represented by its Chief Manager Mr. Nagendra N …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

M/s. Muni Royal Enterprises Represented by Mr. R Muniraj S/o. Muniyappa Ravi, Near Masjid Road, Sy no. 6634/314/46, 47, 48, 49 No. 152800301100901038, Tippu Nagar, Gopasandra Village, Chikkaballapura – 563 125

¶9

And also, at: No. 50, Muniraj Nilaya, 1^st main, 1^st A Cross, Jyothi Nagar, Bangalore – 560 017 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Vinay Paul T K Defendant : Ex parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

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

¶14

2 OA-24/2025

¶15

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs. 25,59,297/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Ninety-Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶16

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

¶17

Term loan of Rs. 22,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Only) for business purpose.

¶18

Cash Credit of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Only) for business purpose.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 11.02.2026.

¶23

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced

¶24

3 OA-24/2025

¶25

Exhibits A-1 to A-5 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 defendant?

¶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 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 due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶32

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

¶34

4 OA-24/2025

¶35

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at

¶36

by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view

¶37

that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶38

In the result, OA.No.24/2025 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶39

Rs. 25,59,297/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-Nine Thousand Two

¶40

Hundred and Ninety-Seven Only) with further interest @12.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered

¶41

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.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

5 OA-24/2025

¶47

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

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

¶49

terms of this final order.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶53

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 28^th Day of April, 2026].

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Mr. Rajendra S Tenginakai, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Exhibits	Description of loan documents
A1	Loan application dated 10.11.2022
A2	Arrangement letter dated 18.01.2023
A3	Hypothecation agreement dated 18.01.2023
A4	Legal notice dated 17.10.2024
A5	Statement of account
tness Exa	mined for the Defendant: -Nil -
t of Docu	ments Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶61

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶62

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Muni Royal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Muni Royal

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 versus Radhey Shyam Trading Company

Mr Prakash Shankar Naidu versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S Babbar Brothers HUF

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus M/S Mir Decorations

West Bengal Gramin Bank versus Mr. Amal Paul Prop. of Shibnath Marketing @ Mr Amal Pal and Anr.

Bank of Baroda versus Asha M R