Allowed

Canara Bank v. Balaji Trading Company Represented by its Proprietor Sri Vikas Govil

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/13/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for a recovery certificate against a defaulting borrower. The claim was unopposed as the respondent appeared ex parte. The Court reduced the interest rate to 10% simple and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate for execution.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate to be drawn for Rs.47,26,107/- plus interest at 10% p.a. simple from filing of OA.

Canara Bank versus Balaji Trading Company Represented by its… — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.13/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Having its branch at Banashankari 2^nd Stage Branch, 121, 27^th Cross, Banashankari II Stage, Bengaluru – 560070 Rep. by its Chief Manager K V Sreedevi …

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

M/s. Balaji Trading Company Rep. by its Proprietor Sri. Vikas Govil, S/. Sri. Sivashankar Govil Aged 53 years, No.5, 7^th Main, 2^nd Cross, Andhrahalli Main Road, Hegganahalli Village, Maruthi Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560091 And Mr. Vikas Govil Residing at Flat No.G 02, Karishma Classic, Sy.No.37/2, Channasandra, Uttarahalli, Bangalore – 560061 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : B Rajashree & Rajesh S Defendant : Exparte

OA. No.13/2022

:FINAL ORDER:

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 defendant for Rs.47,26,107/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakh Twenty Six Thousand One Hundred and Seven only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed the Working Capital of Rs.50.00 lakhs on 15.03.2019 for business purpose.

¶17

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendant executed necessary loan documents.

¶18

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶19

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.

¶20

OA. No.13/2022

¶21

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 16.12.2025.

¶23

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A3 to A8 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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.

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶26

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

¶27

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶28

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶29

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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, as to the execution of loan documents as

¶30

OA. No.13/2022

¶31

¶32

claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶33

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

¶34

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for business 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 10.00% (simple).

¶35

In the result, OA.No.13/2022 stands allowed,

¶36

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.47,26,107/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakh Twenty Six One Hundred and Seven only) with further interest of 10.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from defendant, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA.

¶37

ii) In the event of failure of the defendant to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to proceed against the

¶38

OA. No.13/2022

¶39

¶40

defendant personally and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶41

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶45

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

¶46

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of December 2025].

¶47

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

ANNEXURES

¶49

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶50

AW-1: Deepak Kumar Branch Manager of the applicant bank.

¶51

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶52

Annexure	Particulars
A3 Sanction Letter for	WorkingCapital Term

¶53

OA. No.13/2022

¶54

¶55

A4	Debtor creditor agreement dated 31.03.2021 and connected documents
A5	Debt restructuringagreement dated 31.03.2021
A6	Legal notice dated 02.11.2021 postal receipt and returned envelope and acknowledgment
A7	Account statement regarding the term loan account No.1147746000007
A8	Certificate by Banker under 2A(b) and 2A(c) of the Bankers Book of Evidence Act

¶56

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Balaji Trading Company Represented by its Proprietor Sri Vikas Govil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Balaji Trading Company Represented by its Proprietor Sri Vikas Govil

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri.Ramesh. B. Gowda

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ramraj Grewal

Canara Bank versus Mr. Bhanu Tiwari

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sri.Bheemaraya. N. Bhosale

Mrs Praveena Pattanashetti versus Union Bank of India

Mr Mohammad Ali Saifuddin Navalgund versus Idbi Bank