KAVERI GRAMEENA BANK vs SRI.H.N MAHADEVA SWAMY on 27 June 2025

: - O R D E R - :

1. The Application was filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Bengaluru on 21.12.2015 Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debt And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and numbered as OA No. 2/2016, seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 16,62,467/- (Rupees sixteen lakh sixty-two thousand four hundred and sixty- seven only). Subsequently, owing to bifurcation of jurisdiction vide Government of India Gazette Notification dated 30.01.2017, the Application (OA No. 2/2016) was transferred from Debts Recovery Tribunal -I, Bangalore to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No. 736/2017. The defendants availed 3 credit facilities from the applicant bank, 1st credit facility for Crop Loan of Rs 1,21,500/- (Rupees one lakh twenty-one thousand five hundred only), 2nd loan is agricultural term loan of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), thirdly and lastly a Term loan of Rs. 6,25,000/- (Rupees six lakh twenty-five thousand only) by the defendants and defaulted subsequently in gross violation of the terms and conditions stipulated in the loan agreement is the subject matter of the TA.

2. It is also stated that the facility is secured by hypothecation of movables and mortgage of immovable properties in the Schedule of the TA.

3. The Applicant further contents that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendants failed in compliance of the same and all the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

4. Summons was taken out and as the defendants filed their Vakalath, objection statement, and adduce evidence by defendant no.1 as DW1 and defendant no. 2 to 5 filed a memo to adopt the same. On 25.01.2024 counsel for defendants filed a retirement memo. The applicant was adduced their evidence through AW3, who filed proof affidavit, produced documents and got marked Ext.A1 to A24. Along with the proof affidavit the defendants had produced some receipts which showing the amount credited Tobacco Board to CGB Hediyala.

5. In the statement of objection filed by Defendants contented that the they had not agreed for charging interest over and above 14.25% p.a. and loan agreement executed by the defendants are not properly stamped and the defendants are availed the subsidy under SC/ST corporation, State Government of Karnataka, on the assurance made by the earlier bank manager, the defendants availed the tractor loan, but now the applicant bank is denying the same and claiming entire amount without taking note of any subsidy. The statement of account produced by the applicant bank is not specified the rate of interest charged.

6. While dealing with the above contentions related to stamp duty in 2015, under the Karnataka Stamp Act, the stamp duty for a guarantee deed related to a loan amount of Rs. 50,000 was 0.1% of the loan amount, subject to a maximum of Rs. 10 lakhs. Therefore, for a Rs. 50,000 loan, the stamp duty would be Rs. 50 (0.1% of 50,000) and the other documents are also properly stamped and registered according to the Act.

7. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest. However, the defendants are failed to substantiate their contention with the support of any kind of documentary evidence.

8. The Applicant evidence remain un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove the TA claim. Hence the Applicant is to be found entitled for the TA claim as the only issue as to the proof of TA claim is answered in favour of the applicant.

9. Since the TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest with default interest and that the facilities are availed in respect of Agricultural facilities the pendent lite and future interest is awarded at simple rate that too at reduced rate of 8%.

10. In view of the above i. TA 736 OF 2017 stands allowed, ii. Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.16,62,467/- (Rupees sixteen lakh sixty-two thousand four hundred and sixty-seven only) consisting of:

a) Defendant No.1 and 2 are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 2,23,355/- (Rupees two lakh twenty-three thousand three hundred and fifty-five only) with future and pendent lite interest @ 8.00%. (simple), b) Defendant No. 1 and 5 are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,17,655/- (Rupees one lakh seventeen thousand six hundred and fifty-five only) with future and pendent lite interest @ 8.00%. (simple),

c) Defendant No. 1, 3 and 4 are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 13,21,457/- (Rupees thirteen lakh twenty-one thousand four hundred and fifty-seven only) with future and pendent lite interest @ 8.00%. (simple), from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA in respective accounts and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. The scheduled to the OA to be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate. iii. If the sale proceeds are not sufficient to clear the liability, then the Defendants are jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable to be proceed against for realization of respective dues. iv. A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms.

v. Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order. vi. Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceeding for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

11. 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 (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to PY directly on the Computer, after its transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 27th day of June, 2025)

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Applicant Witness:

AW1 –Sri. Ravi Kumar S, Manager, Applicant Bank Exhibits on the part of the Applicant: Ext A1- Loan Application Ext A2- Sanction letter Ext A3- Hypothecation agreement Ext A4- Declaration form No.3 Ext A5- Letter of commitment Ext A6- Letter of commitment Ext A7- Statement of Accounts Ext A8- Loan Application Ext A9- Personal loan agreement Ext A10- Guarantee Agreement Ext A11- Letter of commitment Ext A12- Letter of commitment Ext A13- Statement of Accounts

Ext A14- Loan Application Ext A15- Sanction letter Ext A16- Agreement of Hypothecation Ext A17- Supplementary Agreement Ext A18- Declaration in form No.3 Ext A19- Letter of commitment Ext A20- Letter of commitment Ext A21- Statement of Account Ext A22- Legal Notice Ext A23- Postal receipts

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

-

DW1- Sri. H. N. Mahadeva Swamy

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -

Ext D1- Evidence affidavit Ext D2- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 25.11.2008 Ext D3- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 26.11.2008 Ext D4- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 11.12.2008 Ext 5- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 11.12.2008 Ext D6- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 12.12.2008 Ext D7- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 12.02.2011 Ext D8- Deposit amount CGB Bank Hadiyala dated 29.11.2013

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER