Allowed

Canara Bank v. Ganesh Markala

DRT18 Dec 2025OA/1383/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for issuance of Recovery Certificate against defaulting borrowers. The court reduced interest from the claimed rate to 10% p.a. (Simple) and directed recovery from movable and immoveable properties jointly and severally.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.53,44,128/- with 10% p.a. simple interest, to be recovered jointly and severally from defendants' property and other assets.

Canara Bank versus Ganesh Markala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 18^th Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

OA.No.1383/2024

BETWEEN:

Canara Bank

Varambally Branch

Bramavara Post,

Udupi Taluka and District-576213 …APPLICANT

¶11

AND:

¶12

Sri Ganesh Markala S/o. Muthu Markala R/at: 1-189, Sankada Bagilu Kadoor Post, Kokkarne Udupi- 576234

¶13

Sri. Muthu Markala S/o. Budda Markala R/at: 1-189, Sankada Bagilu Kadoor Post, Kokkarne Udupi- 576234

¶14

...DEFENDANTS

¶15

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Malini Vinay Defendants : Exparte

¶17

: Exparte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶20

¶21

OA 1383-2024

¶22

Rs.53,44,128/- (Rupees fifty three lakh forty four thousand one hundred twenty eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶23

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶24

I. Term Loan of a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Only) and

¶25

II. OD loan limit of Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight lakh Only).

¶26

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with sanction memorandum, registered mortgage deed and letters of revival in favor of the applicant bank.

¶27

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

¶28

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶29

Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶30

¶31

OA 1383-2024

¶32

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 07.01.2025.

¶33

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-18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶34

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶35

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶36

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶37

OA claim as against the defendants?

¶38

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶39

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶40

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶41

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

¶42

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit

¶43

OA 1383-2024

¶44

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶48

are availed by defendants for Term loan purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate,

¶49

this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced

¶50

interest @10% p.a.(Simple).

¶51

In the result, OA.No.1383/2024 stands allowed,

¶52

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶53

sum of Rs.53,44,128/- (Rupees fifty three lakh forty four thousand one hundred and twenty eight only) with further interest @10% p.a. (Simple),

¶54

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶55

OA 1383-2024

¶56

¶57

jointly severally and personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶58

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶59

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶63

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶64

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶65

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

¶66

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 18^th day of December, 2025].

¶67

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 1383-2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶72

AW-1: Prathibha Pamidi, Chief Manager, of the Applicant Bank.

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	14.01.2020	Sanction Memorandum
A2	18.01.2020	Agreement cum deed of hypothecation
A3	18.01.2020	Memorandum of agreement
A4	18.01.2020	Registered mortgage deed
A5 & A6	18.01.2020	Guarantee covering letter with guarantee agreement
A7	11.01.2023	Letter of revival
A8	06.07.2020	Request for OD
A9	06.07.2020	Cash Credit agreement
A10	06.07.2020	Pronote
A11to A12	06.07.2020	Guarantee covering letter with guarantee agreement
A13	31.03.2022	Letter of revival
A14 to A16		Legal notice with acknowledgements
A17 & A18		Statement of accounts

¶75

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶76

-Nil -

¶77

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶78

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Ganesh Markala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Ganesh Markala

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

Paramjeet Singh versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Md Anwar Hussain And Ors. Propietor of Ms Madina Cloth Store versus West Bengal Gramin Bank

Suresh Kumar versus Canara Bank

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Deepak Kumar

Jarina Bibi And Ors. Pro of Ms Bhangari Shop versus Indian Bank

Federal Bank versus M/s Ave Maria Industries