Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sri Basavaraja M

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/844/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate against a defendant for an agricultural loan. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal admitted the claim but directed recovery at a reduced interest rate of 6% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 28,88,939/- with further interest at 6% p.a. (simple) until realization; recovery from defendant's assets and personally.

State Bank of India versus Sri Basavaraja M — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.844/2022

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

State bank of India Head office at: St. Marks road, Bangalore Branch office at: Shikaripura, Shikaripura Taluk, Shimoga District, Karnataka State

¶6

Represented by its Chief Manager Sri. Suresh Basavaraj Dodamani …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Basavaraja M S/o. Sri. Malleshappa Aged about 44 years

¶9

Residing at: Shivaji Kaniya Village, Sanda Post, Shikaripura Taluk, Shimoga District, Karnataka State – 577 427 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : N G Ravi Kumar Defendant : Ex parte

OA-844/2022

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 defendant for Rs 28,88,939/- (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lakhs Eighty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-Nine Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed the following credit facilities:

¶17

KCC limit of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only).

¶18

ATL loan of Rs. 14,00,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Only) for the purpose of and development.

¶19

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

¶20

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

OA-844/2022

¶23

¶24

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 13.12.2023.

¶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-11 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 defendant?

¶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 defendant 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, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶32

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶33

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

¶34

OA-844/2022

¶35

¶36

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

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

¶38

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities is 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).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.844/2022 stands allowed,

¶41

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 28,88,939/- (Rupees Twenty-Eight Lakhs Eighty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-Nine Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to

¶42

be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶43

OA-844/2022

¶44

¶45

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

¶46

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant

¶47

personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under

¶48

the loan accounts.

¶49

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.

¶50

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

¶51

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

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

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

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

¶58

the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of April, 2026].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-844/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1 Rama Nagappa Moger, S/o. Nagappa Moger, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶67

Exhibit Nos.	date	Particulars of Documents
A1	05.06.2018	Loan application
A2	------	Letter of arrangement
A3	05.06.2018	Hypothecation agreement
A4	04.06.2018	Registered mortgage deed
A5	24.11.2020	Revival letter
A6	01.12.2021	Statement of accounts from 01-01-2018 to 01- 12-2021 with certificate
A7	07.06.2018	Loan application
A8	07.06.2018	Letter of arrangement
A9	07.06.2018	Hypothecation agreement
A10	01.12.2021	Statement of accounts from 07-06-2018 to 01- 12-2021
A11	16.12.2021	Legal notice
Witness	Examined for	the Defendant: -Nil -

¶68

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Sri Basavaraja M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sri Basavaraja M

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

Union Bank of India versus S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N