Allowed

Canara Bank v. Shivanand Mahadevappa

DRT12 Nov 2025OA/1308/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate against two agricultural loan defaulters appearing ex parte, noting sufficient documentary proof of debt and security interests.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for principal Rs. 23,81,033.56 with 6% simple interest; defendants to pay jointly, severally, and personally.

Canara Bank versus Shivanand Mahadevappa — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 12^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1308/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Yergatti Branch, Mahabaleshwar complex, Gokak road, yergatti, Saundatti Taluk, Dist. Belagavi

¶6

Through its Senior Manager

¶7

Mr. Rahul Shukla …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Shivanand Mahadevappa Hadimani S/o. Mahadevappa Hadimani Age: 50 years At & post: Madamageri Village, Savadatti Taluk, Belgaum – 591 129

¶10

Mr. Nagappa Mahadevappa Hadimani S/o. Mahadevappa Hadimani Age: 43 years At & post: Madamageri Village, Savadatti Taluk, Belgaum – 591 129 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Mr. Venu K V Defendants : Ex parte

OA-1308/2024

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 23,81,033.56/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eighty One Thousand and Thirty Three and Paisa Fifty Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the 1^st defendant availed of following credit facilities:

¶18

1^st agricultural facility loan of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Only) for towards crop production on 21.08.2017.

¶19

2^nd agricultural facility loan of Rs. 4,95,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Ninety Five Thousand Only) for land development on 28.09.2017.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan document along with simple mortgage deed.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, 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 accounts as NPA.

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶23

OA-1308/2024

¶24

¶25

the amount due in the account.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 30.10.2025.

¶27

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. 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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶34

OA-1308/2024

¶35

¶36

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶37

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.1308/2024 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 23,81,033.56/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eighty One Thousand and Thirty Three and Paisa Fifty Six Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule 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

¶44

OA-1308/2024

¶45

¶46

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance

¶47

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶48

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶49

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

¶50

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order

¶51

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 12^th Day of November, 2025].

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA-1308/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶64

AW-1: Naga Chetan M, S/o. Naraharinath M, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶65

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶66

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Loan application dated 19.08.2017
A2	Sanction memorandum dated 21.08.2017
A3	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 21.08.2017
A4	Simple mortgage deed dated 18.08.2017
A5	Deed of guarantee for agricultural advanced dated 21.08.2017 executed by defendant no. 2
A6	Loan application dated 19.08.2017 for Rs. 4,95,000/-
A7	Memorandum of sanction of Rs. 4,95,000/- dated 28.09.2017
A8	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 28.09.2017
A9	Deed of guarantee for agricultural advanced dated 28.09.2017 executed by defendant no.2
A10	Notice dated 30.04.2024
A11	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants loan accounts 05178440001430
A12	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants loan accounts 05178230005389
A13	Combined statement showing total outstanding balance

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

Sd/-

¶72

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Shivanand Mahadevappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Shivanand Mahadevappa

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Kala Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Malkeet Singh @Malkit Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Hopstop Private Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S Ambey India

State Bank of India versus Saravanan Mani

Canara Bank versus Mahantesh Arjun