Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Yellam Raju Sivasankara

DRT24 Jul 2026OA/286/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act by State Bank of India to issue a Recovery Certificate against a defendant for a loan default, as the defendant appeared ex parte and evidence was uncontroverted.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate to be drawn for Rs. 23,19,658.57 plus interest at 11.75% p.a. from 05.11.2024 for execution.

State Bank of India versus Sri Yellam Raju Sivasankara — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of July 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.286/2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

State Bank of India Hoskote Branch K.R. Road, Sri.Sannidhi, Near J C Circle, Hoskote-562114, Bangalore Rural District

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. Yellam Raju Sivasankar, S/o.Sri.Rathnam Raju, R/at.Vemulachedu Village, Sydapuram Mandalam, Nellor-524407 Sri.Potti Sriramulu District, Andhapradesh

¶11

And also at:

¶12

Sri.Yellam Raju Sivasankar S/o.Sri.Rathnam Raju, R/at: Alliaz Technology SE Pune, First Floor, Wing-4 Chestee C, EON Freezone, Plat No.1, Sl No.77, MIDC Knowledge Park, Pune-411014 Maharashtra. ...DEFENDANT

¶13

OA. No.286/2025

¶14

¶15

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Sri. P.Muniraju Defendant : Exparte

¶17

: FINAL ORDER:

¶18

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 defendant for Rs.23,19,658.57/-(Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Nineteen Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight and Paise Fifty Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶19

The Defendant availed Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Only) under grant Term Loan under Xpress Credit Loan i.e. Personal Loan, by executing all the relevant loan documents.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendant executed necessary loan documents and salary slip.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in

¶22

OA. No.286/2025

¶23

¶24

default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶25

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 defendant being set exparte on 18.11.2025.

¶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 A1 to A13 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 proof affidavit.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

OA. No.286/2025

¶33

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶36

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.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for Grant Term Loan under Xpress Credit Loan i.e. Personal Loan, and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, as prayed in the OA at the rate of 11.75% p.a.(simple).

¶38

OA. No.286/2025

¶39

¶40

In the result, OA.No.286/2025 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.23,19,658-57/-(Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Nineteen Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Eight and Paise Fifty Seven Only) from the defendant due as follows.

¶42

a) A sum of Rs.23,19,658-57/-(Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Nineteen Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty-Eight and Paise FiftySeven Only) with further interest of 11.75% p.a.(simple) from 05.11.2024 till the realization, due as Grant Term Loan under Xpress Credit Loan i.e. Personal Loan. from defendant after giving credit to the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶46

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

¶47

OA. No.286/2025

¶48

¶49

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

¶50

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶51

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

¶52

with this Final Order.

¶53

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

¶54

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

¶55

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶56

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of July 2026].

¶57

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶58

ANNEXURES

¶59

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1: Sri. Rajendra Tenjinaka, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶61

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶62

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1.	A copy of the loan application dated 11.04.2023	A1
2.	A copy of the Appraisal cum sanction report dated 11.04.2023	A2
3.	A copy of the arrangement letter dated 11.04.2023	A3

¶63

OA. No.286/2025

¶64

4.	A copy of the personal loan agreement dated 11.04.2023	A4
5.	A copy of the consent from dated 11.04.2023	A5
6.	A copy of the Irrevocable instructions letter dated 11.04.2023	A6
7.	A copy of the salary slip of the defendant for December 2022	A7
8.	A copy of the salary slip of the defendant for January2023	A8
9.	A copy of the salary slip of the defendant for February2023	A9
10.	A copy of the irregular notices dated 05.02.2024	A10
11.	A copy of the irregular notices dated 05.06.2024	A11
12.	A copy of the legal notices dated 24.09.2024	A12
13.	A copy of the statement of Personal Loan Account No.41824344509.	A13

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Sri Yellam Raju Sivasankara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Yellam Raju Sivasankara

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

Kaushelendra Pratap others versus Grihum Housing Finance Limited

Ms Lakshya Textiles Agency versus Uco Bank

Ms Maxx Metal Pvt. Ltd. and Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Gireesh Chand Garg versus Punjab National Bank

Rohit Jaiswal versus Canara Bank

Smt Alka and Another versus Canara Bank