Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Annappa Babu Biradar Patil

DRT20 Aug 2026OA/2871/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against a defendant who failed to repay agricultural loans. The debt was established due to non-repayment, resulting in default. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the applicant, reducing the interest rate to 6% per annum simple.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 23,11,936/- with 6% simple interest from filing date until realization.

State Bank of India versus Sri Annappa Babu… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 20^th Day of August, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.2871/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India Sri. Siddeswara Road, Athani, Belgaum District Represented by its Chief Manager Sridhar S …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Annappa Babu Biradar Patil S/o. Sri. Babu Biradar Patil Aged about 75 years R/at: Zunjarwad Village, Athani Taluq, Belgaum District – 591 230 ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : G N Satya Murthy Defendant : Ex parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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

¶13

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs 23,11,936/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand Nine

¶14

Hundred and Thirty-Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶15

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed the

¶16

OA-2871/2025

¶17

¶18

following credit facilities:

¶19

KCC loan of Rs. 5,80,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Eighty Thousand Only) for cultivation of crops.

¶20

ATL loan of Rs. 6,50,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for cultivation.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents along with Simple mortgage deed.

¶22

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.

¶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 defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 09.04.2026.

¶25

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof

¶26

Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

OA-2871/2025

¶30

¶31

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶32

claim as against the defendant?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶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 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 document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶36

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived

¶38

at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.2871/2025 stands allowed,

¶40

OA-2871/2025

¶41

¶42

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 23,11,936/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-Six Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered 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.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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.

¶46

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶47

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶49

OA-2871/2025

¶50

¶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

¶54

the Open Court, this the 20^th Day of August, 2026]. Sd/-

¶55

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1 Sarvesh B, S/o Basavaraj, Asst Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Exhi bits	Date	Particulars
A1	09.03.2015	Application for loan
A2	09.03.2015	Sanction letter
A3	09.03.2015	Hypothecation agreement
A4	09.03.2015	Mortgage deed
A5	18.06.2016	Application for loan
A6	18.06.2016	Sanction letter
A7	18.06.2016	Hypothecation agreement
A8	18.06.2016	Mortgage deed
A9	10.03.2025	Legal notice
A10	10.03.2025	Postal receipt
A11	04.03.2025	Certified accounts extract
A12	04.03.2025	Certified accounts extract
A13	10.06.2025	Account closure summary
A14	10.06.2025	Account closure summary

¶61

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶62

-Nil -

¶63

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶65

Sd/-

State Bank of India v. Sri Annappa Babu Biradar Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Annappa Babu Biradar Patil

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

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Sri.Heeru Somalu Lamani

Canara Bank versus Sri.Vijayakumar

Canara Bank versus Sri.Veerendra. D.M

Ms Anjani Kumar Srivastava and Others versus Mansarovar Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Mr Amit Kumar Nag and Anr. versus Axis Bank Limited

Sri Tuhin Kumar Das and Another versus Bank of India