Allowed

State Bank of India v. K Dinesh

DRT8 Jun 2026OA/493/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Karnataka allowed an application for recovery certificate under Section 19 of RDB Act 1993 against a defendant who was set aside in absentia. The Tribunal found the loan documents and default admissible, reduced interest to 8% p.a., and directed recovery from personal assets and schedule property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 59,22,559/- plus interest at 8% p.a. (simple) from filing date; recovery allowed from defendant's personal assets and scheduled property.

State Bank of India versus K Dinesh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 8^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.493/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India No.12, 80 ft Road, 7^th Main, 3^rd Block, Kormangala, Bangalore-560034. Represented by its Authorized officer & Chief Manager, Sri. Jagadish A Badiger.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

K. Dinesh S/o Shankaran Krishnan, Aged about 42 years, No. 54, Bethal Nagar, 1^st Main, Ayyappanagar, K.R Puram Bangalore-560036.

¶10

Also at: No. 11, Kailasam ST, Menambedu, Ambattur, Chennai-600053

¶11

Also At: No. 27, Liberty Acres, Phase 4/5, Sy. No.86, Indalabele Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore-562107.

¶12

...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Sri. Ramagiriyamma & K.M. Sanath Kumara Defendants : Exparte

¶15

2 493/2023

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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 against the defendants for Rs. 59,22,559/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Nine Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed the housing Loan credit facility of Rs. 64,09,000/- from the applicant bank.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with Agreement of Sale, Sanction Letter, Agreement to Mortgage, Sale Deed, Memorandum of Deposit.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, summons the defendant, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 23.10.2025.

¶23

3 493/2023

¶24

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-14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

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

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

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 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 documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

4 493/2023

¶34

the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶35

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶36

availed for Housing 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 8.00% (simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.493/2023, stands allowed,

¶38

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 59,22,559/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Nine Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) 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 proceeding against schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶39

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶40

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.

¶41

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

¶42

5 493/2023

¶43

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶44

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

¶45

of this final order.

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

Rules, 1993.

¶49

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 8^th Day of June, 2026].

¶50

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶51

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶52

ANNEXURES

¶53

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶54

AW-1: Rajendra Tenginakai, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank

¶55

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶56

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	03.08.2020	Copy of the Loan Application
A2	17.03.2020	Copy of Agreement of sale executed by Golden Gate Properties Limited in favour of K Dinesh
A3	03.10.2016	Sanction Letter
A4	14.09.2020	Copy of Loan Agreement for Home Loan Granted to Public
A5	14.10.2020	Copy of Arrangement letter
A6	14.09.2020	Copy of the Arrangement
A7	14.09.2020	Copy of the affidavit and Annexure-A
A8	14.09.2020	Copy of Deed of undertaking

¶57

6 493/2023

¶58

A9	19.10.2020	Copy of the Sale Deed executed by Golden gate properties Ltd., in favour of K Dinesh
A10	21.10.2020	Copy of Memorandum of Deposit of Title deeds
A11	21.10.2020	Copy of Encumbrance
A12	16.03.2022	Copy of the Demand Notice issued under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI ACT along with Postal Receipts
A13	27.05.2020	Copy of the Possession Notice issued under Section 13 (4) of SARFAESI Act along with Postal Receipts
A14	24.06.2022	Copy of the Statement of Account pertaining K.Dinesh

¶59

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

¶60

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. K Dinesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. K Dinesh

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

Ms Ansh Steels versus Ugro Capital Limited

Idfc First Bank Limited versus Sethi Agencies

Bank of Baroda versus Shiv Krishna Enterprises

Master Deepit Patil versus Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank)

Canara Bank versus Sri.L.P. Zakaria Manuel

State Bank of India versus Sri. G. R.Ravindra