The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a Recovery Certificate under the RDB Act, upholding the principal loan amount and agreed interest on two secured credit facilities, as the defendant appeared ex-parte.
Issuance of Recovery Certificate for aggregate sum of Rs. 2,81,97,889/- with further interest; recovery against defendant and schedule property.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU
Dated this 24th Day of October, 2025
Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1425/2024
BETWEEN:
Canara Bank South End Road Branch, No.19 South End Road, Bengaluru- 560004 …APPLICANT
AND:
Mr. Touseef Ahmed S/o. Fareed Ahmed R/at: No.01, Vinobhanagar Main Road, Siddaiah Road, Bengaluru- 560027
Also at: #38/53, Sri Rama Mandir Road, Basavanagudi, Bengaluru- 560004 ...DEFENDANT
Counsel on record/appeared for:
Applicant : C Vinay Swamy Defendant : Exparte
FINAL ORDER
filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for
2
OA 1425-2024
Rs.2,81,97,889/- (Rupees two crore eighty one lakh ninety seven thousand eight hundred eighty nine only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.
3
OA 1425-2024
Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate
for the amount due in the account.
evidence and the proof affidavit.
Both these issues are gone into and decided together.
remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The
OA 1425-2024
4
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 hypothecation 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.
Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence
this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.
are availed by defendant for OD purpose and GECL facility, this
Tribunal in view of the rate of interest as claimed need not be
reduced. However, as the OA Claim is arrived at by calculating
interest at the agreed rate and also by applying default interest,
the prayer for monthly rest and future penal interest are declined.
OA 1425-2024
5
i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate
sum of Rs.2,81,97,889/- (Rupees two crore eighty one lakh
ninety seven thousand eight hundred eighty nine only) with
further interest @ % p.a. (Simple), consisting of:-
a) Rs.2,18,48,384/-(Rupees two crore eighteen lakh forty
eight thousand three hundred and eighty four Only) with further interest @12.10% p.a. (Simple),
b) Rs.63,49,505/- (Rupees sixty three lakh forty nine thousand five hundred and five Only) with further interest @9.25% p.a. (Simple),
from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant
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 other assets of the defendant and schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.
ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings
which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of
receipt of the order.
iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this
OA 1425-2024
6
order and transferred to Recovery for execution.
iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of
in terms of this final order.
14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned
in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16
of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.
[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by
me in the Open Court, this the 24th day of October, 2025].
Sd/ (T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER
ANNEXURES
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:
AW-1: Palanivel Rajan, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.
Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:
| Exhibit Nos. |
Date | Particulars of Documents |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | 02.12.2020 | Sanction letter |
| A2 | 29.12.2020 | Request for overdraft facilities |
| A3 | 29.12.2020 | Letter of Proprietorship |
| A4 | 29.12.2020 | Common hypothecation agreement |
| A5 | 29.12.2020 | Pronote |
| A6 | 07.03.2022 | Application for renewal of limit |
| A7 | 31.05.2022 | Sanction for renewal of limit |
| A8 | 30.06.2022 | Letter of renewal by defendant |
| A9 | 30.06.2022 | Letter of revival |
| A10 | 29.06.2022 | Supplemental common hypothecation agreement |
OA 1425-2024
7
| A11 | 31.05.2022 | Undertaking letter from borrower with regard to the sanction |
|---|---|---|
| A12 & A13 |
03.01.2024 | Legal notice with original postal receipt |
| A14 & A15 |
Statement of accounts |
Witness Examined for the Defendant:
-Nil -
List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -
Sd/ (T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendant?
What order are to be passed?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Canara Bank South End Road Branch
T. RAJESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
