Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mr. Chandrakant Durgappa Konnur

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/1469/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank for issuance of a recovery certificate under the RDB Act. The court found the defendants' default proved by documentary evidence despite their ex parte order, granting recovery of the principal amount with reduced interest.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of aggregate sum of Rs. 23,40,935.89/- plus interest @12% p.a. (simple) subject to joint and several liability. Recovery certificate to be drawn and transferred for execution.

Canara Bank versus Mr. Chandrakant Durgappa Konnur — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1469/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Ghataprabha Branch Near Mrutyunjay Circle, Ghataprabha Dist., Belagavi – 591 306

¶6

Through its Chief Manager

¶7

Mr. Sreekumar Ramachandran …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Chandrakant Durgappa Kumar S/o. Duragappa Shettappa Konnur Aged about 62 years Having address at: Mugalkhod Math, Ghataprabha, Dist. Belagavi, Karnataka – 591 306

¶10

Mr. Siddappa Basappa Jokanatti S/o. Basappa Jokanatti Aged about 50 years At & Post Rajapur, Taluk Gokak, Dist. Belagavi, Karnataka – 591 306

¶11

Shri Kempanna Ramappa Kokkanatti S/o. Ramappa Jokkanatti Aged about 60 years At & post Rajapur, Taluk Gokak Dist. Belagavi, Karnataka – 591 306 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Venu K V Defendants : Ex parte

¶14

2 OA-1469/2023

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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. 23,40,935.89/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Forty Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty Five and Paisa Eighty Nine Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed the following credit facilities:

¶18

Term loan of Rs. 9,50,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for business purposes on 24.02.2015.

¶19

OD loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) on 19.02.2016.

¶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 hypothecation agreement.

¶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 the amount due in the account.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to

¶24

3 OA-1469/2023

¶25

appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 27.08.2024.

¶26

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-3, 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.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

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

¶33

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,

¶34

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶35

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

¶36

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

4 OA-1469/2023

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.1469/2023 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 23,40,935.89/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Forty Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty Five and Paisa Eighty Nine Only) consisting: a. Rs. 10,82,394.31/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Eighty Two Thousand Three

¶42

Hundred and Ninety Four and Paisa Thirty One Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants no. 1 & 2.

¶43

b. Rs. 12,58,541.58/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand

¶44

Five Hundred and Forty One and Paisa Fifty Eight Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants no. 1 & 3.

¶45

After giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during

¶46

the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by

¶47

5 OA-1469/2023

¶48

proceeding against defendants jointly, severally and personally and

¶49

also by proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to

¶50

the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶51

If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the

¶52

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance

¶53

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

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

¶59

terms of this final order.

¶60

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶61

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

¶62

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶64

the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of December, 2025].

¶65

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICE

Sd/-

6 OA-1469/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶70

AW-1: Sandeep Jagannath Makote, S/o. Jagannath, Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶71

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶72

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A3	Loan application dated 24.02.2015
A4	Sanction letter dated 04.07.2015
A5	Composite hypothecation agreement dated 14.07.2015
A6	Guarantee agreement dated 14.07.2015
A7	Letter of revival dated 13.07.2018
A8	Letter of revival dated 12.07.2021
A9	Loan application dated 16.02.2016
A10	Sanction letter dated 18.02.2016
A11	Composite hypothecation agreement dated 19.02.2016
A12	Guarantee agreement dated 19.02.2016
A13	Letter of revival dated 19.02.2019
A14	Letter of revival dated 01.04.2020
A15	Acknowledgement debt dated 19.02.2021
A16	Legal notice dated 11.07.2023
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶73

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶74

Sd/-

Canara Bank v. Mr. Chandrakant Durgappa Konnur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mr. Chandrakant Durgappa Konnur

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri.Ramesh. B. Gowda

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ramraj Grewal

Canara Bank versus Mr. Bhanu Tiwari

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sri.Bheemaraya. N. Bhosale

Mrs Praveena Pattanashetti versus Union Bank of India

Mr Mohammad Ali Saifuddin Navalgund versus Idbi Bank