Allowed

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Basavaraj

DRT20 Aug 2026OA/993/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed Original Application seeking Recovery Certificate against defendants for agricultural loan dues of Rs. 25,54,210.06. Court granted reduced interest at 6% p.a. pending execution against secured schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 25,54,210.06 with interest at 6% p.a. pending against schedule and other assets.

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Basavaraj — Execution and Attachment | 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 Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.993/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Karnataka Grameena Bank (Earlier Krishna Grameena Bank) Desai Kallur Branch, Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburgi District.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri.Basavaraj

¶10

S/o.SriSatalingappa

¶11

Sri.Bheemannagouda S/o.SriSatalingappa

¶12

Both are R/at:

¶13

Guddewadi Village, Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburgi District-585301.

¶14

...DEFENDANTS

¶15

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Sri.T.S.Mahabaleswara Defendants : Exparte

¶17

2 OA No.993/2023

¶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 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.25,54,210.06 (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-Four Thousand Two Hundred Ten and Paisa Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

The Defendant No.1 availed a sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees SeventyFive Thousand Only) for the purpose of Agriculture.

¶21

The Defendant No.1 availed a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of Agriculture Term Loan.

¶22

The Defendant No.2 availed a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of Agriculture Term Loan.

¶23

The Defendants availed a sum of Rs.3,40,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Forty Thousand Only) for the purpose of Agriculture Term Loan.

¶24

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents, being owner of the schedule properties. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage, hypothecation over the Schedule properties.

¶25

3 OA No.993/2023

¶26

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 account as NPA.

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 26.02.2024.

¶29

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A31 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶32

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

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

4 OA No.993/2023

¶36

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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶37

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural purpose and also that 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% p.a.(simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.993/2023 stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.25,54,210.06 (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-Four Thousand Two Hundred Ten and Paisa Six Only) with further interest @ 6% (simple) p.a from the defendants after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and

¶41

received during the pendency of the OA if any, in the loan account and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding the schedule properties. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶42

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

¶43

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due in loan account.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶48

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

¶49

of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶50

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

Sd/-

6 OA No.993/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶55

AW-1: Sri.Amarnath Shetty, Branch Manager of the applicant bank.

¶56

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶57

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Date	Exhibit Number
1.	Loan Agreement	28.05.2009	A1
2.	Registered Mortgaged Deed executed by Defendant No.1	20.05.2009	A2
3.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	20.04.2012	A3
4.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	13.04.2015	A4
5.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	13.03.2018	A5
6.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	03.03.2021	A6
7.	Acknowledgement of security / Liability executed byDefendant No.1	22.06.2020	A7
8.	Statement of account extract		A8
9.	Loan Agreement	27.06.2009	A9
10.	Registered Mortgage Deed executed by Defendant No.1	20.05.2009	A10
11.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	21.05.2012	A11
12.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.1	15.05.2015	A12
13.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant	16.04.2018	A13
14.	Statement of account extract		A14
15.	Loan Agreement executed by Defendant No.2	27.06.2009	A15
16.	Registered Mortgage Deed executed by Defendant No.2	20.05.2009	A16
17.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.2	20.06.2012	A17
18.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.2	28.05.2015	A18
19.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.2	19.05.2018	A19
20.	Revival Letter executed by Defendant No.2	17.05.2021	A20

¶58

7 OA No.993/2023

¶59

21.	Acknowledgement of security / Liability executed byDefendant No.2	14.12.2020	A21
22.	Statement of account extract		A22
23.	Loan Agreement executed by Defendants	14.12.2009	A23
24.	Registered Mortgage Deed executed by Defendant No.1	27.11.2009	A24
25.	Registered Mortgage Deed executed by Defendant No.2	27.11.2009	A25
26.	Revival Letter executed by Defendants	04.12.2012	A26
27.	Revival Letter executed by Defendants	31.10.2015	A27
28.	Revival Letter executed by Defendants	12.07.2018	A28
29.	Revival Letter executed by Defendants	01.07.2021	A29
30.	Acknowledgement of security / liability securitybyDefendant No.1	18.12.2020	A30
31.	Statement of account extract		A31

¶60

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Basavaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. Basavaraj

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