Allowed

State Bank of India v. K Nagaraju

DRT24 Jul 2026OA/864/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by State Bank of India for a Recovery Certificate against legal heirs of a deceased borrower, noting the claim was undisputed due to the defendants' absence.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate directed against Defendant No. 6 personally and Defendants 1 to 5 to the extent of their inheritance of the deceased borrower K Nagaraju's estate.

State Bank of India versus K Nagaraju — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of July, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.864/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

State Bank of India Kollegal Branch, Represented by its Chief Manager, SARB at J C Road, Bangalore-560002.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri K Nagaraju S/o Karuga Setty Since dead by LR’s

¶10

Smt. Vasanthamma W/o Late K Nagaraju Aged about 62 years

¶11

Sri. Murthy S/o Late K Nagaraju, Aged about 39 years

¶12

Smt. Chaitra D/o Late K Nagaraju Aged about 34 years

¶13

Smt. Sangeetha D/o Late k Nagaraju, Aged about 31 years

¶14

Sri. Kantharaj S/o Late K Nagaraju Aged about 36 years

¶15

Sri. Doddabasava

¶16

2 864/2025

¶17

S/o Karuga Setty Aged about 64 years

¶18

All are R/at Tagarapura Mole Kollegal Taluk, Chamarajanagara Dist-571442. ...DEFENDANTS

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶20

Applicant : K.S.Venkataramana Defendants : Exparte

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

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. 23,62,100/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Sixty Two Thousand One hundred Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶23

It is the case of the applicant that the Deceased Borrower K Nagaraju and Defendant No.6 have availed the following loan facilities:-

¶24

I. ATL Loan of a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Two Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) on 23.06.2010.

¶25

II. KCC Loan of a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three Lakh Only) on 24.06.2010.

¶26

III. KCC Loan of a sum of Rs. 2,77,900/- (Two Lakh Seventy Seven Thousand Nine Hundred) on 20.01.2014.

¶27

The defendants No. 1 to 5 are the legal heirs of the deceased K Nagaraju.

¶28

3 864/2025

¶29

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Sanction letter, Mortgage Deed, Legal Notice.

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

Despite, summons on the defendants they failed make an appearance, resulting them being set exparte on 19.11.2025.

¶33

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-10 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶34

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.

¶35

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶36

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

¶37

4 864/2025

¶38

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶39

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶40

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants 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 defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for business 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 6.00% (simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.864/2025, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶45

23,62,100/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Sixty Two Thousand One

¶46

5 864/2025

¶47

Hundred only) with further interest @ 6.00% p.a. (Simple) from the date

¶48

of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants No.6 and the defendant No.1 to 5 to the extent of their inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrower K Nagaraju, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶49

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, all the defendant No.6 personally and his other assets and the from the defendant 1 to 5 to extent of their inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrower K Nagaraju are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶50

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶51

applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶52

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶53

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶54

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

¶55

6 864/2025

¶56

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

¶57

Rules, 1993.

¶58

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of July, 2026].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(T. RAJESH)

¶61

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶62

ANNEXURES

¶63

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶64

AW-1: Syed Mohammed Eliyas, Manager of the applicant Bank

¶65

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶66

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	23.06.2010	Copy of the Loan Application
A2	23.06.2010	Copy of the Sanction letter
A3	24.06.2010	Copy of the Loan Application
A4	24.06.2010	Copy of the Sanction letter
A5	18.06.2010	Copy of the Regd. Mortgage Deed
A6	26.07.2024	Copy of the Legal Notice
A7	--	Original Postal receipt, Acknowledgment
A8	--	Copy of the Statement of Loan A/c 64060689151
A9	--	Copy of the Statement of Loan A/c 64103224713
A10	--	Copy of the Statement of Loan A/c 64134908139

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

-Nil -

-Nil –

Sd/-

7 864/2025

(T. RAJESH)

PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. K Nagaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. K Nagaraju

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

Kaushelendra Pratap others versus Grihum Housing Finance Limited

Ms Lakshya Textiles Agency versus Uco Bank

Ms Maxx Metal Pvt. Ltd. and Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Gireesh Chand Garg versus Punjab National Bank

Rohit Jaiswal versus Canara Bank

Smt Alka and Another versus Canara Bank