Allowed

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank v. Ruman Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash

DRT11 Sept 2026OA/913/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.913/2024 filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act, the Karnataka Grameena Bank sought a recovery certificate from three defendants for a housing loan default of Rs. 41,16,015/-. The defendants were absent, and the application was decided ex parte. The Tribunal held the bank's evidence satisfactory, found the claim within limitation, and allowed the OA with interest reduced to 8% simple per annum due to the housing purpose.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for aggregate sum of Rs. 41,16,015/- with further interest @8.00% p.a. (simple) from date of filing till realization, recoverable from respondents jointly, severally and personally by proceeding against scheduled properties.

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Ruman Arif… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 11^th Day of September, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.913/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Karnataka Grameena Bank Branch office at: Belgaum main Branch, DPD Code; 2202, Shivamale Building, Khadak Galli, Belgaum – 591 108

¶6

Rep by its Senior Manager

¶7

Sri. Parameshwar Mahabaleshwar Gadde …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Ruman Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash S/o. Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash Aged about 34 years

¶10

Mrs. Sahebi Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash W/o. Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash Aged about 59 years

¶11

Both are R/at: Flat no. S-1, Al-fatteh building, plot no. 35, CTS no. 1137, RS no. 45/1B, 4^th cross, Azam Nagar, Kangrali B K Belgaum – 590 010

¶12

Also, at: House no. 43351/D, Ghee galli, Belgaum

¶13

Mr. Iqbal Abdul Majid Naik S/o. Abdul Majid Aged about 47 years R/at; No. 3640, Kangral Galli, Belgaum – 590 001 ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

OA-913/2024

¶15

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : M Mohan Rao Defendants : Ex parte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

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 41,16,015/- (Rupees Forty-One Lakhs Sixteen Thousand and Fifteen Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed housing loan facility of Rs. 31,88,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lakhs Eighty-Eight Thousand Only) for the purchase of purchase of readily built house.

¶21

It is also the case of the, applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents along with deposit of title deeds.

¶22

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.

¶23

OA-913/2024

¶24

¶25

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.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 20.08.2025.

¶27

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-12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

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.

¶34

The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible

¶35

and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the

¶36

OA, and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the

¶37

OA-913/2024

¶38

¶39

defendant and the claim of the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, the Tribunal finds that both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶41

Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶42

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).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.913/2024, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 41,16,015/- (Rupees Forty-One Lakhs Sixteen Thousand and Fifteen 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.

¶45

OA-913/2024

¶46

¶47

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

¶48

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶49

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

¶50

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶51

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

Final Order.

¶57

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT

¶58

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶59

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 11^th Day of September, 2026].

¶60

Sd/-

¶61

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-913/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Mr. Mahalingappa Parappa Bolajadar, S/o. Parappa Bolajadar,

¶67

Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Exhibit	date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	16.10.2019	Loan sanction letter
A2	16.10.2019	Housing loan agreement executed by defendant no.1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A3	16.10.2019	Consideration letter executed by defendant no.1 and 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A4	16.10.2019	Agreement to mortgage executed by defendant no.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A5	23.10.2019	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds executed by defendant no.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A6	23.10.2019	Letter handling over deposit of title deeds executed by defendant no.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A7	23.10.2019	Confirmation of deposit of title deeds executed by defendant no.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A8	11.08.2021	Possession notice issued by the applicant bank to the defendants
A9	26.04.2022	Sale notice issued by the applicant bank to the defendants
A10	13.05.2022	Legal notice issued by the applicant bank to the defendants
A11	---------	Returned postal covers
A12	---------	Statement of account
	Witness Ex	amined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶70

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶71

Sd/-

¶72

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank v. Ruman Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank v. Ruman Arif Iqbal Shaikshabhash

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

Punjab National Bank versus Sunil Rajbanshi and Ors.

Nachattar Singh versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Sri Ajay Raj versus Sir M Visvesvaraya Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Hadimba Agro Industry and Another versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Bank of India versus Ram Patidar

Smt Bhagya T C versus Canara Bank