Allowed

State Bank of India v. Chithavadutta Rajanikanth

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/317/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed by State Bank of India under Section 19 of the RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The respondent appeared ex parte. The court reduced interest to 8% p.a. and granted recovery from personal and mortgaged assets.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.80,30,628.06 plus interest at 8% p.a. recoverable from the respondent personally and against specified properties.

State Bank of India versus Chithavadutta Rajanikanth — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.317/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India, Branch office at: Stressed Assets Recovery Branch No.11/9, 3^rd Floor, Near Old Shivaji Theater, JC Road, Bangalore- 560002

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Chithavadutta Rajanikanth S/o. Janakiramulu Chithavadutta R/at: 4-5-60/17, 1^st Floor, Saibaba Road, Opp. IDBI Bank, Koritipadu, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh- 522007

¶10

Also at: No.13-43, Anasuyamma Colony, Near Venkateshwara Temple, Manopadu Mandalam, Undavelli, Mahabub Nagar, Undavelly, Andhra Pradesh- 509153

¶11

Also at: Flat No.A-203, Second Floor, Block-A, RF Twlight Kote, Kengeri Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bangalore- 560074

¶12

Also at: Gayathri Projects Ltd., No.6-3-1090, TSR Towers, Raj Bhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh- 500082 ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

OA 317/2024

¶14

¶15

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Naveen Tao Defendants : 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 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.80,30,628.06 (Rupees eighty lakh thirty thousand six hundred twenty eight and paise six only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶20

I. Home Loan of a sum of Rs.68,66,000/- (Rupees sixty eight lakh sixty six thousand Only) and

¶21

II. Rinn Raksha Suraksha loan limit of Rs.2,30,000/- (Rupees Two lakh thirty thousand Only).

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with memorandum of agreement, agreement to mortgage and memorandum of deposit in favor of the applicant

OA 317/2024

bank.

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing

¶27

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 accounts as NPA.

¶28

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.

¶29

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 21.01.2026.

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

OA 317/2024

¶33

¶34

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶35

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶36

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶37

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶38

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶39

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 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 as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

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

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶42

OA 317/2024

¶43

¶44

are availed by defendant for Home loan purpose and also that

¶45

OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate,

¶46

this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @8% p.a. (Simple).

¶47

In the result, OA.No.317/2024, stands allowed,

¶48

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶49

sum of Rs.80,30,628.06 (Rupees eighty lakh thirty thousand six

¶50

hundred twenty eight and paise six only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple),

¶51

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant 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.

¶52

Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶53

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendant personally and his other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶55

OA 317/2024

¶56

¶57

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

¶58

receipt of the order.

¶59

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

¶60

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶61

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

¶62

in terms of this final order.

¶63

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

¶64

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

¶65

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶66

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by

¶67

me in the Open Court, this the 27^th day of March, 2026].

¶68

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶69

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶70

ANNEXURES

¶71

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶72

AW-1: Mr. Nagaraja.V, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	23.02.2022	Application for home loan
A2	09.03.2022	Arrangement letter
A3	10.03.2022	Memorandum of loan agreement for home loan
A4	10.03.2022	Deed of undertaking

¶75

OA 317/2024

¶76

¶77

A5	10.03.2022	Agreement to mortgage
A6	10.03.2022	Affidavit
A7	10.03.2022	Indemnity by the borrower
A8	10.03.2022	Rinn Raksha Policy Membership form
A9	10.03.2022	Letter covering the home loan under Rinn Raksha Policy
A10	10.03.2022	Letter requesting for insurance cover from SBI life under Rinn Raksha
A11	10.03.2022	Agreement for additional loan under Rinn Raksha
A12	14.03.2022	Memorandum of Deposit of title deeds registered as document No.KEN-109981- 2021-22, at the office of Sub registrar, Jayanagar (kengeri)
A13	08.11.2022	Demand notice U/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act
A14 & A15		Two postal acknowledgements card served
A16 & A17		Two postal covers returned unserved
A18		Bank statement A/c No.40843710231
A19		Bank statement A/c No.40850276267

¶78

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

¶79

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶80

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Chithavadutta Rajanikanth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Chithavadutta Rajanikanth

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

State Bank of India versus Rajendrakumar Jain

Inno Infra Pvt. Ltd. and 9 Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajdeepsinh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Jaswinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Bandhav Filling Centre