Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Smt Rathnamma

DRT17 Aug 2026OA/471/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application for a Recovery Certificate against the defendants for agricultural loans totaling Rs. 28,69,282.78. The court held the evidence uncontroverted and allowance with 6% simple interest from the filing date to realization against the schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs. 28,69,282.78 with 6% simple interest from filing date to realization against schedule properties.

Union Bank of India versus Smt Rathnamma — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 17^th Day of August, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.471/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India Shikaripura Branch, D No. 1921 2, Opp post Office, Veterinary Hospital Road, Shikaripur, Karnataka – 577 427

¶7

Through its Branch Manager Sri. Deepak P S …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Rathnamma W/o. Maheshwarappa Aged about 52 years R/at: Chikkapura Village, Shikaripura Taluk, Shimoga Dist. Karnataka – 577 214

¶10

Sri. Manjunatha M S/o. Maheshwarappa Aged about 34 years R/at: Chikkapura Village, Shikaripura Taluk, Shimoga Dist. Karnataka – 577 214 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : VS Associates Defendants : Ex parte

OA-471/2025

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs 28,69,282.78/- (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lakhs Sixty-Nine Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty-Two and Paisa Seventy-Eight Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed the following facilities:

¶18

Crop loan of Rs. 8,82,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Eighty-Two Thousand Only) for development of agriculture

¶19

Agricultural loan of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only).

¶20

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

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount 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

OA-471/2025

¶24

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 12.02.2026.

¶26

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-11 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

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

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants 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,

¶33

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶34

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the

¶35

OA-471/2025

¶36

¶37

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶39

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶40

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

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is

¶42

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived 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).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.471/2025 stands allowed,

¶44

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 28,69,282.78/- (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lakhs Sixty-Nine Thousand

¶45

Two Hundred and Eighty-Two and Paisa Seventy-Eight Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till

¶46

the realization, from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all

¶47

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.

¶48

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

¶49

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶50

OA-471/2025

¶51

¶52

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such

¶53

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶55

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

¶56

receipt of the order.

¶57

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

¶58

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶59

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

¶60

terms of this final order.

¶61

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶62

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

¶63

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶64

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶65

the Open Court, this the 17^th Day of August, 2026].

¶66

Sd/-

¶67

(T. RAJESH)

¶68

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶69

ANNEXURES

¶70

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶71

AW-1 B M Vinay, S/o. Mahajirappa, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶72

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶73

Exhibits	Particulars
A-1	Loan application dated 16.06.2016

¶74

OA-471/2025

¶75

¶76

A-2	Sanction letter
A-3	Sanction letter
A-4	Deed of simple mortgage dated 15.06.2016
A-5	Hypothecation agreement dated 17.06.2016
A-6	Letter of undertaking dated 17.06.2016
A-7	Term loan agreement dated 16.06.2016
A-8	Deed of guarantee dated 17.06.2016
A-9	Legal notice dated 06.11.2023
A-10	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant’s loan account no. 560961000279735
A-11	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant’s loan account no. 560941000053684

¶77

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶78

-Nil -

¶79

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶80

Sd/-

¶81

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Smt Rathnamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Smt Rathnamma

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

Canara Bank versus Sri.H. R. Chandrappa

Canara Bank versus Smt.Narayanamma

Bank of India versus Sri.Lohit Rudrappa Bullapur

M/S Shoolini Associate versus the Baghat Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Gyamtso Regency Hotel And Anr.

State Bank of India versus Ashok J S