Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sri Sanganna

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/2892/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993. It granted a recovery certificate for an aggregate sum of Rs. 22,28,076.21 including principal and reduced interest at 6.00% per annum against the defendants and their schedule property.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 22,28,076.21 with reduced interest at 6.00% p.a. on principal and future interest from date of filing.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Sri Sanganna — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of August, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2892/2025

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank Udachan Branch, Udachan Village and Post, Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburagi District-585217, Represented by Manager, Mr. Ravindra. …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

1.Sri. Sanganna S/o Late Sri. Laxman Maddi, Aged about Major

¶8

Sri. Ravuthgouda Patil S/o Apparayya Gouda Patil Aged about Major

¶9

Both are residing at: R/o Bhosga Village, Afzalpur Taluk, Gulbarga District-585301.

¶10

...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M. Krishnappa Defendants : Exparte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance

¶15

2 2892/2025

¶16

of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 22,28,076.21/(Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Twenty Eight Thousand Seventy Six and Paise Twenty One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is the legal heir of late Sri. Laxman Maddi (Borrower/ Mortgagor) and the 2^nd defendant stood as Guarantor of the Agri Term Loan availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶18

i. Kisan Credit Card Loan of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only).

¶19

ii. Agricultural Term Loan of sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Only)

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Loan agreement, Guarantor Letter Simple Mortgage Deed, Memorandum cum sanction letter.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶22

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.

¶23

3 2892/2025

¶24

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 09.04.2026.

¶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 A-1 to A-19 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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of Mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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

¶32

4 2892/2025

¶33

the limitation.

¶34

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.

¶35

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

¶36

In the result, OA.No.2892/2025, stands allowed,

¶37

i. The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of

¶38

Rs.22,28,076.21/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Twenty Eight Thousand Seventy Six and Paise Twenty One only) consisting of:

¶39

a. Rs.39,322.21 /- with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant No. 1;

¶40

b. Rs.21,88,754.00/- with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant No.1 & 2 with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants including defendant No.1 to the extent of their inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrower Sri. Laxman Maddi, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during

¶41

5 2892/2025

¶42

the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Schedule Properties 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 defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for the 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 terms

¶49

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

¶50

Rules, 1993.

¶51

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of August, 2026].

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶54

6 2892/2025

¶55

ANNEXURES

¶56

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶57

AW-1: Ravindra, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank

¶58

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶59

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	07.01.2013	Application for Crop Loan/ renewal application
A2	07.01.2013	Loan Agreement
A3	05.01.2016	Letter of Revival
A4	10.08.2018	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A5	30.12.2020	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A6	25.12.2023	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A7	04.03.2013	Appraisal Memorandum cum sanction letter
A8	24.04.2013	Simple Mortgage Deed registered as document No. AZP-1-00267-2013-14 at the office of Sub registrar Afzalpur
A9	07.05.2013	Loan Agreement
A10	07.05.2013	Guarantor Agreement
A11	31.12.2015	Letter of Revival
A12	10.08.2015	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A13	30.12.2020	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A14	25.12.2023	Letter of Revival of Legal Heirs
A15	01.07.2025	Legal Notice along with Postal receipts
A16	-	Two Postal Acknowledgement card served
A17		(old Bank Statement A/c No. 2058019294 and A/c Mo. 11058130001285) New Bank Statement A/c No. 0581534009217

¶60

7 2892/2025

¶61

A18 (old Bank Statement A/c No. 74007188665) New Bank Statement A/c No. 05815326029313

¶62

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

¶63

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sri Sanganna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Sri Sanganna

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank