Allowed

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Mrs G Sharadamma

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/73/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The Tribunal found the claim of Rs. 31.42 Lakhs against the respondents admissible and sufficient, reducing the interest rate to 8% simple per annum. A Recovery Certificate was ordered to be drawn and transferred to the Recovery Officer for execution.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate drawn for Rs. 31,42,431.78 plus interest at 8% simple p.a. from filing date, recoverable from defendants jointly and severally against schedule properties.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Mrs G Sharadamma — Banking and Recovery | 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.73/2025

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Gramin Bank Branch office at: Mulbagal Branch, MC road, Opposite Government hospital, Mulbagal, Kolar District – 563 131

¶6

Represented by its Manager

¶7

Mr. K Shanmukha …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mrs. G Sharadamma W/o. B Devananda Aged major R/at: Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Mulbagal Taluk, Kolar District – 563 131

¶10

Mr. B Devananda S/o. Buchappa Aged major R/at: Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Mulbagal Taluk, Kolar District – 563 131

¶11

Mr. N Ramachandra S/o. Narayanappa Aged major R/at: Sangesandra Village, Mulbagal Taluk, Kolar District – 563 131 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M V Kini & Co. Defendants : Ex parte

OA-73/2025

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 31,42,431.78/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-Two Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty-One and Paisa Seventy-Eight Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed a housing loan of Rs. 8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only).

¶19

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

¶20

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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.

¶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, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 25.03.2026.

¶23

OA-73/2025

¶24

¶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-18 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 ex parte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed.

¶32

The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the OA, and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶33

OA-73/2025

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is availed for Housing purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is of the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.73/2025, stands allowed,

¶38

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 31,42,431.78/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Forty-Two Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty-One and Paisa Seventy-Eight Only) with further interest @8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and 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 the schedule properties. Properties schedule 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 defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶40

OA-73/2025

¶41

¶42

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶43

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

¶44

receipt of the order.

¶45

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

¶46

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶47

v) Interim application pending, if any, are disposed of with this

¶48

Final Order.

¶49

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶50

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

¶51

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶52

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

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶55

ANNEXURES

¶56

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶57

AW-1: Tulasi Kumari P, /o. Ramaswamy P, Chief Manager, of

¶58

Applicant Bank.

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Exhibi	Date	Documents
ts
A1	24.11.2009	Application of housingloan
A2	07.12.2009	Sanction memorandum
A3	22.01.2010	Simple mortgage
A4	22.01.2010	Pronote and take deliveryletter of DPN
A5	22.01.2010	Housingloan agreement

¶61

OA-73/2025

¶62

¶63

A6	08.11.2012	Letter of revival
A7	08.11.2012	Letter of revival
A8	27.08.2015	Letter of revival
A9	27.08.2015	Letter of revival
A10	23.08.2018	Letter of revival
A11	23.08.2018	Letter of revival
A12	02.08.2021	Letter of revival
A13	02.08.2021	Letter of revival
A14	11.12.2023	Letter of revival
A15	11.12.2023	Letter of revival
A16	10.08.2021	Acknowledgment of security/liability from mortgagors
A17	12.11.2024	Legal notice
A18	---------	Statement of account for A/c. no. 75815102364210 (old a/c no. housing loan 3642) along with certificate U/s. 2A of the banker’s book of evidence act, 1981
Witne	ss Examined f	or the Defendants: -Nil -
List of	Documents E	xhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶64

Sd/-

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Mrs G Sharadamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Gramin Bank v. Mrs G Sharadamma

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