Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mallappa Chavadappanavar

DRT12 Nov 2025OA/1313/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This debt recovery tribunal allowed an origin application under the RDB Act for issuance of a recovery certificate. The bank proved credit avulsion for agriculture and default. Trial was conducted ex parte. Court allowed claim with reduced interest.

What did the court decide?

Order to allow OA; recovery certificate to be drawn and transferred for execution against defendants jointly and severally; cost of proceedings awarded.

Canara Bank versus Mallappa Chavadappanavar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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

¶4

OA. No.1313/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Yergatti Branch Mahabaleshwar Complex Gokak Road, Yergatti, Saundatti Taluk, Dist. Belagavi Through its Senior Manager Mr. Rahul Shukla

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Mallappa S Chavadappanavar S/o. Shetteppa Chavadappanavar Aged about 53 years At and post: Aladkatti KM Village, Savadatti Taluk, Belgaum-591129

¶10

Mr. Basappa B Satyanaikar S/o. Bhimappa Satyanaikar Aged about 68 years At and post: Aladkatti KM Village, Savadatti Taluk, Belgaum-591129 ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Sri. Venu K V Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.1313/2024

: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 defendants for Rs.28,95,555.62/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five and Sixty Two Paisa only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the financial assistance towards agricultural purpose for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- towards crop production on 01.08.2016 and Rs.7,00,000/- for land development on 30.07.2016.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule properties.

¶19

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 account as NPA.

¶20

OA. No.1313/2024

¶21

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the accounts.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 19.12.2024.

¶24

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

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

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶31

OA. No.1313/2024

¶32

¶33

remains unrebutted as defendants 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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶34

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

¶35

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶36

was availed for agriculture 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 6.00% p.a.(simple).

¶37

OA. No.1313/2024

¶38

In the result, OA.No.1313/2024 stands allowed,

¶39

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.28,95,555.62/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Ninety Five Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Five and Sixty Two Paisa only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants, 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 defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶40

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶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

OA. No.1313/2024

¶43

¶44

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

¶45

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶46

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶47

with this Final Order.

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶53

ANNEXURES

¶54

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶55

AW-1: Mr. Naga Chetan, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶56

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶57

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Loan application dated 30.07.2016
A2	Sanction memorandum dated 01.08.2016
A3	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 01.08.2016
A4	Simple mortgage deed dated 21.12.2015
A5	Deed of guarantee for agricultural advanced
	dated 01.08.2016 executed by defendant No.2

¶58

OA. No.1313/2024

¶59

¶60

A6	Loan application dated 300.07.2016
A7	Memorandum of sanction dated 09.08.2016
A8	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 09.08.2016
A9	Deed of guarantee for agricultural advanced dated 09.08.2016 executed by defendant No.2
A10	Simple mortgage dated 26.08.2017
A11	Notice dated 30.04.2024
A12	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants’ loan account No.05178440001390
A13	Tru extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants’ loan account No.05178230004812
A14	Combined statement showing total outstanding balance

¶61

Sd/-

¶62

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mallappa Chavadappanavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mallappa Chavadappanavar

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