Allowed

Canara Bank v. Gurappa Basappa Madiwalar

DRT25 Nov 2025OA/1416/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The court found the defendants in default of an agricultural loan, proved via uncontroverted documentary evidence, and granted recovery of the dues with reduced interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 62,55,252.26 with 6% simple interest p.a. to be realized from defendants against Schedule 'A' properties and other assets.

Canara Bank versus Gurappa Basappa Madiwalar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1416/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank, Gadag Main Branch, Mahalakshmi Centenary Complex, Bank Road, Gadag- 582 101, Represented by its Senior Branch Manager, Sri Sunil Ganapat Metre, S/o Sri Ganapat.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri Gurappa Basappa Madiwalar, S/o Basappa, Aged about 64 years, Residing at Neeralagi Village, Gadag Taluk, Gagag District- 582 102.

¶10

Sri Basavaraj Shetappa Naludi, S/o Shetappa Naludi, Aged about 52 years, Residing at: Mulgund Village, Mulgund Taluk, Gadag District- 582 117. ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : M Mohan Rao Defendants : Exparte

OA 1416/2022

FINAL ORDER

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 against the defendants for Rs. 62,55,252.26 (Rupees Sixty Two Lakh Fifty Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Two and paise Twenty 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 defendant No. 1 as borrower and defendant No. 2 as guarantor availed agricultural loan facility of Rs. 7,22,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Twenty Two Thousand Only) to purchase tractor and trailer.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Despite, summon on the defendants, they failed to appear,

¶22

OA 1416/2022

¶23

¶24

resulting the defendants being set exparte on 06.10.2023.

¶25

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-3 to A-18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶29

as against the defendants?

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put

¶33

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 due are also proved by the above

¶34

documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

The applicant bank states that the defendant No.1 is the owner of

¶36

OA 1416/2022

¶37

¶38

the Schedule ‘C’ uncharged property which he has written a letter to the

¶39

applicant bank stating that he could not mortgage the schedule ‘C’ property, hence the applicant bank has no charge over it.

¶40

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶41

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

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶43

availed for Agriculture purpose and also that the 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% (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.1416/2022, stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶46

62,55,252.26 (Rupees Sixty Two Lakh Fifty Five Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Two and paise Twenty Six Only) with further interest @6.00 %

¶47

p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally, after giving credit to all the

¶48

amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and

¶49

allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule “A”

¶50

property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶51

OA 1416/2022

¶52

¶53

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the

¶54

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally & personally and their assets including ‘C’ Schedule property and the assets hypothecated (Schedule B) are liable for amount due under the loan account.

¶55

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶60

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

¶61

Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 25^th Day of November, 2025].

¶63

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶64

ANNEXURES

¶65

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Sunil Ganapat Metre, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

OA 1416/2022

¶68

¶69

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶70

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A3	19.08.2005	Loan application
A4	19.08.2005	Quotation issued by pragathi Agro Engineering
A5	24.08.2005	Agreement for agricultural advances executed by defendant No.1 for Rs. 7,22,000/- in favour of the applicant bank
A6	24.08.2005	Guarantee agreement executed by defendant No.2 in favour of the applicant bank
A7	24.08.2005	Consideration receipt for Rs. 7,22,000/- executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A8	23.08.2005	Simple mortgage deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the applicant bank
A9	02.05.2008	Letter of revival executed by defendant No.1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A10	05.04.2011	Letter of revival executed by defendant No.1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A11	05.02.2014	Letter of revival executed by defendant No.1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A12	02.01.2017	Letter of revival executed by defendant No.1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A13	16.12.2020	Letter of revival executed by defendant No. 1 & 2 in favour of the applicant bank
A14	03.01.2020	Notice issued by applicant bank to defendants
A15	--	Returned postal cover
A16	--	RTC extract in respect of Survey No. 27/3B measuring 3 Acres 02 Guntas situated at Neuralgia Village, Gadag Taluk and Distrirct
A17	20.08.2007	Letter issued by defendant No.1 to the applicant bank
A18	--	Statement of account
Witness	Examined fo	r the Defendants: -Nil -

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶74

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

Canara Bank v. Gurappa Basappa Madiwalar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Gurappa Basappa Madiwalar

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

Basil Co. versus Kerala Gramin Bank

Uco Bank versus Sh. Bachchan Kumar Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Bhagwant Singh

Indu Kumari Pandey versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus M/S K. K. Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Mr. Praveen