Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Charles Rajakumar

DRT29 May 2026TA/1269/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 88 lakhs plus interest against two borrowers who defaulted on a housing term loan. The bank proved its claim through certified accounts; respondents were set ex-parte and did not contest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.88,04,525.81 plus interest at 8.40% p.a. with monthly rests, costs, and right to sell schedule property if payment fails.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Charles Rajakumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶2

29.05.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 29^th day of May, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No.1269 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA No.153 of 2022 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1269 of 2023)

¶9

Karnataka Bank Ltd., Anna Salai Branch, No.190/192, Hamid Complex, Anna salai, Chennai- 600 006 Rep by its Senior Branch Manager …Applicant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

Mr. Charles Rajakumar. C.J.

¶12

S/o Mr. P. C. Jayaraj,

¶13

No.11, Cross Street,

¶14

West Karaikalan, 3^rd street

¶15

SIDCO Nagar,

¶16

Adambakkam, Chennai- 600 088

¶17

Mrs. S.G. Esther Rul Mary,

¶18

W/o Mr. Charles Rajakumar C.J.

¶19

No.11, Cross Street,

¶20

West Karaikalan, 3^rd street

¶21

SIDCO Nagar,

¶22

Adambakkam, Chennai- 600 088 ….Defendants

¶23

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶24

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. R. Thirumalai

¶25

Defendants 1 and 2 were set ex-parte on 04.10.2023

¶26

: - FINAL ORDER- :

¶27

This Original Application is filed on 22.03.2022 by the applicant bank

¶28

under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act,

¶29

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶30

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶31

¶32

29.05.2026

¶33

against the defendants 1 and 2, jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of Rs.88,04,525.81p (Rupees Eighty Eight Lakhs Four

¶34

Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Five and Eighty One Paise only) due in respect of Term Loan (A/c No. 4637001600830801) repayable together with further interest @ 8.40% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, for sale of schedule mentioned immovable property and for costs of this OA.

¶35

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.153 of 2022, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.153 of 2022 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1269 of 2023.

¶36

Brief Facts of the case:

¶37

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

¶38

It is the case of the applicant bank that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for Housing Loan for purchasing the schedule mentioned property. After due consideration, the applicant had sanctioned a Term Loan of Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs only) to the defendants and on the terms and conditions stipulated in its sanction letter Ref: CMRS/RLPC/500/34234/2018-19 dated 29.11.2018.

¶39

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶40

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶41

¶42

29.05.2026

¶43

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the Loan is repayable in 240 Equated Monthly Instalments of Rs.66,040/- each, together with interest thereon @8.70% p.a. The rate of interest is rising or falling with the MCLR as fixed by the bank from time to time. The defendants have agreed to repay the loan amount together with interest @0.05% above the Karnataka Bank’s MCLR (Marginal cost Lending rate at the time of sanction of loan was 8.65%) revised from time to time. In case of default in making the repayment, the defendants had agreed to pay 5% penal interest on the defaulted sum.

¶44

The applicant bank submits that accepting the said terms and conditions, the defendants had availed the above facility under Term Loan account No. 4637001600830801 and purchased the schedule mentioned property, being residential flat in the apartment known as “KRISH CROCUS” situated at Plot No,6,7 & 8, Manohar Nagar extension, Pallikaranai, Chennai- 600100. In consideration therefore and towards securing the due repayment thereof the first and second defendants have executed the following documents in favour of applicant bank:

¶45

a) Term loan agreement executed by 1^st and 2^nd defendants on 15.12.2018

¶46

b) Letter of declaration executed by the 1^st defendant on 15.12.2018

¶47

c) Letter of declaration executed by the 2^nd defendant on 15.12.2018

¶48

The applicant submits that under the Term Loan agreement dated

¶49

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶50

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶51

29.05.2026

¶52

¶53

15.12.2018, the defendants undertook to effect repayment of the above facility in 240 equated monthly installments of Rs.66040/- together with interest thereon @8.70%p.a. compounded monthly. The rate of interest is rising or falling with the MCLR as fixed by the bank from time to time. Towards securing the repayment, the defendants had created Equitable Mortgage of the schedule mentioned property in favour of the applicant under Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 21.12.2018 registered under Document No.13811 of 2018.

¶54

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the defendants were effecting repayment upto February 2020. Thereafter as per RBI circular the applicant has allowed moratorium upto August, 2020 and the defendants are supposed to start to repay the EMIs from September, 2020. However, they failed to do so despite repeated requests and reminders and hence the loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 15.12.2020.

¶55

The applicant bank is maintaining true and correct amount with respect to the loan account in the normal course of business and the statement of accounts by way of computer generated certified under sec.2 (A)(B)(C) of Bankers’ Book Evidence At. 1891, which is produced along with this application. The applicant bank declares that compound interest has been charged at such rate and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of the Reserve Bank of India. The applicant bank has not debited the interest during NPA period in view of directions of the RBI, regarding income recognition and

¶56

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶57

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶58

29.05.2026

¶59

¶60

assets classifications of loan accounts under which if an account is running irregular for more than 90 days it has to be classified as Non-Performing Asset. This however does not relieve the defendants from their liability to pay interest. As per the said stipulation the present rate of interest payable by the defendants is @8.40% p.a. compounded monthly on the outstanding balance. The MCLR is subject to revision from time to time as may be decided by the applicant bank in conformity with the terms agreed by the defendants. Hence as per Section 21A and 35-A of the banking regulations act, 1949. The applicant bank is entitled to receive interest at the contractual rate from the defendants until repayment in full.

¶61

It is submitted that the applicant had caused notice dated 19.04.2021 calling upon the defendants to effect repayment of the entire outstanding balance as on that date. Such notice has been served on both the defendants, however they failed to comply with the terms of the notice. Hence, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶62

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was duly served in respect of D-1 and D-2. When OA was taken up on 04.10.2023 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 04.10.2023

¶63

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶64

records.

¶65

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶66

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶67

29.05.2026

¶68

¶69

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sh. C. Fiyaz Ahmed, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank, has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A-1 to A-11 .

¶70

A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-11 evidence that the borrowal of credit facilities and execution of loan and security documents are true, in terms of averments made in Original Application as well as Proof Affidavit filed by applicant bank establishing its claim. Applicant bank filed Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, evidencing the amount claimed against defendants.

¶71

The defendants were set ex-parte on 04.10.2023, but till this day they did not take any action to set aside the ex-parte order and did not choose to contest the claim. Further, a careful scrutiny of records makes it

¶72

clear that present application is filed well within limitation and this Tribunal possesses necessary and proper jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the claim. No oral or documentary evidence on the side of defendants are produced or filed to dispute the claim of applicant bank. Hence, it can be concluded that applicant bank has proved its claim against defendants.

¶73

With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

¶74

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶75

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

29.05.2026

: O R D E R :

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶80

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally, for recovery of a total sum of Rs.88,04,525.81p (Rupees Eighty Eight Lakhs Four Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Five and Eighty One Paise only) due in respect of Term Loan (A/c No. 4637001600830801) repayable together with further interest @ 8.40% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, along with costs of this application.

¶81

(b) In the event of failure of the Defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned immovable property morefully detailed in the OA schedule.

¶82

¶83

(d) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of

¶84

OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the Defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the Defendant and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by Defendants to the applicant bank.

¶85

(e) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days

¶86

from the date of receipt of this final order.

¶87

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶88

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶89

¶90

29.05.2026

¶91

(f) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶92

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶93

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶94

(Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 29^th day of May, 2026)

¶95

ANNEXURES

¶96

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶97

AW-1: Sh. C. Fiyaz Ahmed, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶98

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶99

Sl. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	15.12.2018	Sanction order	A-1
2.	15.12.2018	Term loan agreement	A-2
3.	15.12.2018	Letter of declaration	A-3
4.	15.12.2018	Letter of declaration	A-4
5.	19.04.2021	Recall notice	A-5
6.	-	Acknowledgement card	A-6
7.	-	Acknowledgement card	A-7
8.	21.12.2018	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds (Doc. No. 13811 of 2018)	A-8
9.	21.12.2018 Regt on 11.12.2018	Construction agreement between 1. Charles Rajakumar, 2. Esther arul mary and M/s Krish Homes (Doc.No.13208 of 2018)	A-9
10.	11.12.2018	Sale deed in favour of 1. Charles Rajakumar, 2. Esther arul mary and M/s Krish Homes (Doc.No.13208 of 2018)	A-10

¶100

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

¶101

T.A. No.1269 of 2023

¶102

¶103

29.05.2026

¶104

- Account statement with certificates.

¶105

A-11

¶106

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶107

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶108

:-SCHEDULE-:

¶109

SCHEDULE - A PROPERTY

¶110

(Total property)

¶111

All that piece and parcel of land consisting of Plot Nos.6,7,8 in Manohar Nagar, 15^th street extension situated at Pallikaranai Village, Sholinganallur taluk, Kancheepuram district comprised in Old survey No.618/1, New survey No. 618/12 measuring about 5400sq,ft Bounded on the

¶112

North by: Plot no.9

¶113

South by: Plot No.5

¶114

East by: 20 feet road

¶115

West by: vacant site

¶116

SCHEDULE – B PROPERTY (Mortgaged to the applicant)

¶117

923sq.ft out of 5400 sq.ft undivided share of land in the schedule-A mentioned property together with flat bearing No. A in the first floor measuring 1812sq.ft of super built up area (inclusive of common and a covered car parking in still floor) of the apartment known as “KRISH CROCUS” bearing plot Nos. 6, 7 & 8, Manohar Nagar extension, Pallikaranai, Chennai-600 100.

¶118

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶119

Uploaded on 29.05.2026 at 17:00 hours

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Charles Rajakumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Charles Rajakumar

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

Rbl Bank Limited versus Mr Dr R Manivannan

Punjab National Bank versus Shalini Sathishbabu

Canara Bank versus R G Enterprises Rep By Mr R Sathish And two Others

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Vaizier Tailors Textiles

Karur Vysya Bank versus Almeida

Idbi Bank versus The Goverment Telecommunication Emp Co. Op Socity Ltd.