Allowed

State Bank of India v. Smart Tech

DRT29 May 2026OA/417/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for a recovery certificate. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal found the loan documents and evidence admissible and sufficient to prove the loan facility, defaults, and amount due, allowing the OA with reduced interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate for Rs.37,69,333/- plus interest at 12% p.a. allowed to be recovered from defendant personally and hypothecated assets.

State Bank of India versus Smart Tech — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of May, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.417/2025

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State Bank of India, SME Centre, Mysore Branch, SARB at JC Road, Bangalore- 560002

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

M/s Smart Tech (Proprietorship firm) At No.365 (OLD No.3105) K.T. Street, Mandi Mohalla, Mysuru- 570017

¶9

Also at: Mohammed Aziz Ahmed, No.101, LIG-1A, KHB Colony, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Kalyangirinagar, Mysore- 570019

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : K.S & K.S Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶15

OA 417/2025

¶16

¶17

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate Rs.37,69,333/- (Rupees thirty seven lakh sixty nine thousand three hundred thirty three only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed the Cash credit facilities of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees sixteen lakh only) from the applicant bank. Further, this loan facility was enhanced from time to time.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with letter of arrangement and agreement of loan cum hypothecation in favor of the applicant bank.

¶20

It is further contended that, the defendant 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 accounts as NPA.

¶21

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶22

Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate

¶23

OA 417/2025

¶24

¶25

for the amount due in the account.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 12.01.2026.

¶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-10 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:

¶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

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶34

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶35

OA 417/2025

¶36

¶37

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.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶41

are availed by defendants for Cash Credit purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate,

¶42

this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @12% p.a. (Simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.417/2025, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶45

sum of Rs.37,69,333/- (Rupees thirty seven lakh sixty nine

¶46

OA 417/2025

¶47

¶48

thousand three hundred thirty three only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple),

¶49

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 defendant including

¶50

his other assets along with the hypothecated schedule if any.

¶51

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

in terms of this final order.

¶57

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶58

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

¶59

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶60

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th day of May, 2026].

¶61

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 417/2025

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Narshimha Murthy, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶68

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	05.03.2021	Loan application
A2	17.03.2021	Letter of arrangement
A3	17.03.2021	Agreement of loan cum hypothecation
A4	23.03.2022	Loan application
A5	24.03.2022	Letter of arrangement
A6	24.03.2022	Supplemental agreement of loan cum hypothecation
A7	06.09.2023	Letter of arrangement
A8	22.08.2024	Legal notice
A9		Postal receipts
A10		Cover/ tracking
A11		Statement of account with closure menu vide A/c No.40090225929

¶69

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

¶70

Sd/

¶71

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Smart Tech

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Smart Tech

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 Bank Limited versus Aby Abraham

RRaju Kalidoss versus Canara Bank

Sajan S versus Yes Bank

Vinod Kumar Gupta versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Marvel Metals Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Mr B S Girisha versus Dcb Bank Limited