Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Sri Sai Ram Print Tec

DRT4 Mar 2026OA/2681/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by Bank of Baroda for issuance of Revenue Certificate against a proprietary concern and its proprietor for outstanding loan amounts and interest. The court held the evidence uncontroverted and the claim within limitation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs.59,61,002.39 with interest to be enforced against defendants jointly, severally, and personally, and their assets.

Bank of Baroda versus Sri Sai Ram Print Tec — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 4^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2681/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Bank of Baroda BTM layout, 2^nd Stage Branch, Sanskriti Signet, No.76, 1^st Cross, BTM Layout, 2^nd Stage, Bengaluru- 560068

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

M/s Sri. Sai Ram Print Tec Proprietor Mr. H K Guruprasad No.10 & 10/1, Out Of VP Khatha No.336 & 325/12 Bommanahalli Gramanathana, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru- 560068

¶9

Mr. H K Guruprasad R/at: Dhatri Residencey, 109, B block, 1^st Floor, Begur, Mylasandra Road, Bengaluru- 560068

¶10

...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Skanda Legal Defendants : Exparte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶15

OA 2681/2024

¶16

¶17

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.59,61,002.39 (Rupees fifty nine lakh sixty one thousand two and paisa thirty nine only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a Proprietary concern with defendant No.2 as its Proprietor. The defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶19

I. Cash Credit Loan of a sum of Rs.49,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lakh Only) and

¶20

II. AWCTL limit of Rs.9,50,000/- (Rupees Nine lakh fifty thousand Only).

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with hypothecation agreement, sanction letter, demand promissory note in favor of the applicant bank. 4. It is further contended that, the defendants despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan

OA 2681/2024

accounts as NPA.

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.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 01.08.2025.

¶27

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-20 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

OA 2681/2024

¶33

¶34

10. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶35

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

¶36

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶37

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

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶39

are availed by defendant for Cash credit purpose, this Tribunal in view of the rate of interest as claimed need not be reduced. However, as the OA Claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate and also by applying default interest, the prayer

¶40

for monthly rest and future penal interest are declined.

¶41

OA 2681/2024

¶42

¶43

13. In the result, OA.No.2681/2024, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶45

sum of Rs.59,61,002.39 (Rupees fifty nine lakh sixty one thousand two and paisa thirty nine only) consisting of:-

¶46

a) Rs.58,50,539.23 (Rupees fifty eight lakh fifty thousand five hundred thirty nine and paisa twenty three Only) with further interest @10.20% p.a. (Simple) and

¶47

b) Rs.1,10,463.16 (Rupees one lakh ten thousand four hundred sixty three and paisa sixteen Only) with further interest @7.85% p.a. (Simple),

¶48

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶49

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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶50

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants

¶51

jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable

¶52

to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶53

OA 2681/2024

¶54

¶55

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶56

which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of

¶57

receipt of the order.

¶58

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

¶59

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶60

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

¶61

in terms of this final order.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶63

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶64

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 4^th day of March, 2026].

¶65

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶66

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶67

ANNEXURES

¶68

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Mr. Devi Dayal, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	25.10.2019	Sanction letter
A2	30.10.2019	Letter of sole proprietorship
A3	30.10.2019	Composite hypothecation agreement
A4	30.10.2019	Demand promissory note

¶72

OA 2681/2024

¶73

¶74

A5	30.10.2019	Letter of continuing security
A6	30.10.2019	Declaration cum undertaking cum authority
A7	30.10.2019	Letter of undertaking under CGTMSE scheme
A8	30.10.2019	Letter of authority in bank’s favor to disclose or publish the name of the borrower in case of default of loan/advance
A9	30.10.2019	Letter of undertaking in respect of book debts
A10	30.10.2019	Power of attorney in respect of book debts
A11	11.06.2020	Sanction letter
A12	22.06.2020	Hypothecation agreement
A13	06.07.2020	Declaration cum undertaking cum authority
A14	06.07.2020	Request cum undertaking letter of disbursement of loan
A15	06.07.2020	Letter of installment with acceleration clause
A16	06.07.2020	Letter of acknowledgement of debt
A17	30.06.2023	Letter of acknowledgement of debt
A18	21.09.2024	CERSAI Certificate
A19	26.08.2024	Statement of accounts 29600500000053
A20	26.08.20244	Statement of accounts 29600600002763

¶75

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

¶76

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Sri Sai Ram Print Tec

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Sri Sai Ram Print Tec

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri Avijeet Ghosh and Anr.

Aamner Multi Food Processing versus Central Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S S.S. Sandhu Trading Company

M Rajshekar versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Basavaraj Ningappa

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus K B Annegowda