Allowed

Union Bank of India v. S Kannaiah

DRT20 Aug 2026OA/82/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application seeking a Recovery Certificate for an NPA housing loan. Despite the defendants appearing ex parte, the court found the evidence unrebutted. It ordered recovery of the principal balance plus interest at a reduced rate of 8% per annum and directed procedural steps for execution.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 23,65,359.51 plus 8% p.a. simple interest from filing date, recoverable from defendants jointly and severally against property and assets.

Union Bank of India versus S Kannaiah — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 20^th Day of August, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.82/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Union Bank of India No. 1010, Ground Floor, 26^th Main Road, 4^th floor, Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 041

¶7

Represented by its Senior Manager Sri. A V S S Ramesh Reddy D …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. S Kannaiah S/o. K Venkataswamy Aged About 45 years R/at: No. 416, 2^nd floor, Nanda Gokula, 4^th Main Road, Nagendra Block, Banashankari 3^rd Stage, Bangalore – 560 050

¶10

Mrs. Kavitha K W/o. S Kannaiah Aged about 42 years R/at: No. 416, 2^nd floor, Nanda Gokula, 4^th Main Road, Nagendra Block, Banashankari 3^rd Stage, Bangalore – 560 050 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Shivashankar A Defendants : Ex parte

OA-82/2023

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 23,65,359.51/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Sixty-Five Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty-Nine and Paisa Fifty-One 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 a housing loan of Rs. 37,50,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Seven Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of purchase of land and construction of house.

¶18

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 deposit of title deeds.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

OA-82/2023

¶22

¶23

Despite, entering appearance/filing vakalat, no written statement filed by the defendant nos. 1 & 2. Hence, the chance for filing written statement stands closed on 05.01.2026. The Defendants placed ex parte on 19.02.2026.

¶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-8 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 defendants?

¶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 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶31

OA-82/2023

¶32

¶33

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the

¶34

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find 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 the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.82/2023 stands allowed,

¶38

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 23,65,359.51/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Sixty-Five Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty-Nine and Paisa Fifty-One 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 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.

¶39

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

¶40

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶41

OA-82/2023

¶42

¶43

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

¶44

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶46

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

¶47

receipt of the order.

¶48

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

¶49

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶50

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

¶51

terms of this final order.

¶52

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶53

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

¶54

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶55

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 20^th Day of August, 2026].

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

(T. RAJESH)

¶58

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1 Garima Garg, D/o. Radhey Shyam Magrawal, Deputy Manager,

¶61

of Applicant Bank.

¶62

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶63

Exhibits	DESCRIPTION
A1	Loan application dated 15.10.2019 submitted by defendants
A2	Sanction letter dated 29.05.2019 issued by applicant/plaintiff bank

¶64

OA-82/2023

¶65

¶66

A3	Agreement for term loans dated 19.11.2019 executed by defendants
A4	Letter of undertaking dated 20.11.2019 executed by defendants in favour of applicant bank
A5	Sale deed dated 21.11.2019 submitted by the defendants
A6	Memorandum of deposit of title deed dated 21.11.2019, Registered dated 27.11.2019 executed by the 1^stdefendants
A7	13(2) demand notice dated 16.02.2022 under SARFAESI act, 2002 issued by applicant/plaintiff bank along with acknowledgement
A8	Certified copy of the statement of account bearing no. 560631001093523
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶67

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. S Kannaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. S Kannaiah

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 Vikas Grameena Bank versus Sri.Heeru Somalu Lamani

Canara Bank versus Sri.Vijayakumar

Canara Bank versus Sri.Veerendra. D.M

Ms Anjani Kumar Srivastava and Others versus Mansarovar Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Mr Amit Kumar Nag and Anr. versus Axis Bank Limited

Sri Tuhin Kumar Das and Another versus Bank of India