Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
BANK OF BARODA vs M/S BANASHANKARI CATERERS REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. NAGESH.C. on 17 July 2026
17.07.2026 for orders.
Presiding Officer
17.07.2026
17.07.2026
**TA** No.4/2024 stands allowed, with
interest and costs, vide separate order.
Presiding Officer
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 17<sup>th</sup> day of July, 2026
**Present: Sri Imtiaz Ali
Presiding Officer**
**TA No.4/2024**
**BETWEEN:**
**BANK OF BARODA**
Singena Agrahara Branch,
No. E-3, APMC Fruit and Vegetable Market, Singena Agrahara, Huskur Road, Bengaluru-560099 Represented by Senior Manager Mr. Kumar Rohit S/o. Pradeep Kumar Singh, **..APPLICANT**
**AND:**
**1. M/s Banashankari Caterers,**
Represented by its Proprietor,
Mr. Nagesh C, No.30/43,
Hulimangala Main Road, Thirupalya Village, Bommasandra Post, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluka, Bengaluru-560099
** ..DEFENDANT**
**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
Applicant : Sri. Prakasha Hegde K
Defendants : *ex-parte*
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
**FINAL ORDER**
The present TA has been filed by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of money of **Rs.24,42,727.97 (Rupees twenty four lakh forty two thousand seven hundred twenty seven and ninety seven paisa only)** together with costs, interest, etc.
2TA.No.4/2024
2. The case of the Applicant Bank is that, the Defendant as a Borrower, represented by its Proprietor Mr. Nagesh C had approached the Applicant Bank for Various Loan Facilities. Accordingly, considering the request, the Applicant Bank had sanctioned the following loan facilities:-
i) Overdraft facility Loan of Rs.20,00,000/- on 13.02.2014
ii) FITL Covid Loan of Rs.1,15,441/-
Hence, the Defendant executed Loan Documents in favour of the Applicant Bank and agreed to repay the loan in equated monthly installments with interest as stipulated in the loan agreement.
In order to secure the loan, the Defendant side have executed various documents viz., Demand Promissory Note, Undertaking, Supplemental Composite Agreement of Hypothecation, Sanction Letter, etc.,
3. The Defendant after utilising the said loans have failed and neglected to make the repayment of the loans due as agreed and Defendant have not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and condition agreed by the Defendant. In view of the continued default, the loans accounts were classified as Non-Performing Asset on **31.03.2021**. Thereafter, the Applicant Bank has issued Legal Notice on **29.11.2022** and called upon the Defendant to repay the entire loan due. In spite of receipt of repeated remainders of legal notice, the Defendant have failed to pay the outstanding dues and 3TA.No.4/2024
hence the recovery process is initiated to recover the dues.
4. In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that Defendant are liable to pay a total sum of **Rs.24,42,727.97 (Rupees twenty four lakh forty two thousand seven hundred twenty seven and ninety seven paisa only)**.
5. After filing this TA, summons were sent to the Defendant through RPAD. But returned with postal remarks **"Address Left"**. Thereafter the Applicant Bank has published the summons to the Defendant on 09.02.2025, in English and vernacular language in Local newspapers, viz., – **"The Hindu Bengaluru** (English Edition)" and **"Samyuktha Karnataka"**. When the Defendant was called out, found absent and hence, placed ex parte.
6. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, it's Branch Manager, Sri. Devi Dayal, has filed his affidavit by way of evidence the same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked at Ex.A1 and list of documents came to be marked at Ex.A2 and 23 documents came to be marked at Ex.A3 to A25.
7. No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.
8. Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/ Applicant Bank heard and perused the records of the case.
4TA.No.4/2024
9. Following points arise for my consideration:
1. 1) Whether Plaintiff/Applicant Bank proves its case as contended in the plaint/application?
2. 2) What Order?
10. For the following reasons, I answer the above-referred points in the following manner:
R E A S O N S
11. The Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and his affidavit is also corroborated by the above-referred Ex.A3 to A25 which clearly establish the case of the Applicant Bank to allow the present TA. Added to this the Defendant had remained absent, hence it is to be construed that Defendant admitted the entire case pleaded by the Applicant Bank in the present TA.
12. Therefore, for these reasons, present TA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.
O R D E R
TA Present ~~TA~~ stands allowed, with interest and cost.
Defendant is liable to pay a sum of **Rs.24,42,727.97 (Rupees twenty four lakh forty two thousand seven hundred twenty seven and ninety seven paisa only)** along with cost, interest @10% p.a. from the date of Application till the realization of the entire amount to the Applicant Bank.
5TA.No.4/2024
In the event of failure of the Defendant to pay the said TA amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the Schedule-A Property mentioned in the main application in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA.
On failure to pay the above T.A amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against person and properties of the Defendant in accordance with law.
Office is directed to issue Recovery Certificate as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA and do the needful as required under the law forthwith.
The Office is directed to issue, as far as possible, free copy of this order to the parties concerned.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 17<sup>th</sup> day of July, 2026)
**(Imtiaz Ali)** **Presiding Officer** **DRT-I, Bengaluru**
**ANNEXURES**
**Witness Examined for the Applicant Bank:**
AW-1 : Sri. Devi Dayal
The Branch Manager of Applicant Bank
**List of Documents Exhibited for the Applicant Bank:**
Ex.A-1 : Affidavit of AW-1
Ex.A-2 : List of Documents
6TA.No.4/2024
Ex.A-3 : On Demand Promissory Note
Ex.A-4 : Declaration's-cum-Undertaking-cum Authority
Ex.A-6 : Composite Hypothecation Agreement
Ex.A-7 : Undertaking
Ex.A-8 : D.P Note for Sole-Proprietorship Firm Ex.A-9 : Declaration's cum Undertakings cum Authority Ex.A-10 : Letter of Continuing Security Ex.A-11 : Supplemental Composite Agreement of Hypothecation Of Goods, Book-Debts, Movable Machinery & Vehicles Ex.A-12 : Power of Attorney in respect of book-Debts Facility Ex.A-13 : Sanction Letter Ex.A-14 : S.P. Note for Sole-Proprietorship Ex.A-15 : Supplemental Composite Agreement of Hypothecation Of Goods, Book-Debts, Movable Machinery & Vehicles
Ex.A-17 : Declaration's cum Undertakings cum Authority Ex.A-18 : Letter of Continuing Security Ex.A-19 : Power of Attorney in respect of Book-Debts Facility Ex.A-20 : Executed Letter of Acknowledgement of Debt Ex.A-21 : Executed Letter of Acknowledgement of Debt Ex.A-22 : Statement of Account Loan Account Ex.A-23 : Statement of Account Loan Account Ex.A-24 : Legal Notice Ex.A-25 : Postel Receipt **Witness Examined for the Defendants:**
- Nil -
**List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:**
- Nil -
17.7.26
(Imtiaz Ali)
DRT-I, Bengaluru
.KP.