Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Uma H Desai

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/1470/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application to issue a Recovery Certificate. The court found the loan documents and default uncontroverted, granting recovery of principal and interest capped at 6% simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.37,47,210.83 plus 6% p.a. simple interest, recoverable from schedule properties and personally; costs to applicant.

Canara Bank versus Smt. Uma H Desai — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of August, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1470/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Having its head office at No.112, J.C. Road, Bengaluru – 560002 and Having branch at Gajendragad, TMC 2435, 1^st Floor, Bhoomireddi Complex, Ron Road, Gajendragad, Gadag District – 582114 Rep. by its Senior Manager and Letter of Authority Holder Mr. Rahul Kapoor … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Uma H Desai W/o. Hanumatha Rao Desai, Aged about 46 years Mudhol, Yelaburgi, Koppal – 583236 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Sri. K. Raveendran Defendants : Exparte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶14

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for

¶15

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶16

OA. No.1470/2022

¶17

¶18

Rs.37,47,210.83 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Two hundred Ten and Eighty Three Paise only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed Agricultural credit- Short Term/Term loan of Rs.6,00,000/- for Grape cultivation.

¶20

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

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account 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 defendant, she failed to

¶24

OA. No.1470/2022

¶25

¶26

appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 29.10.2024.

¶27

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A3 to A15 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

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

¶33

remains unrebutted as defendant 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the

¶34

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also

¶35

OA. No.1470/2022

¶36

¶37

proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well

¶38

within the limitation.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶40

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%

¶41

(simple).

¶42

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

¶43

In the result, OA.No.1470/2022 stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶45

of Rs.37,47,210.83 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Forty Seven

¶46

Thousand Two hundred Ten and Eighty Three Paise only) with further interest @ 6.00 % p.a. (simple), from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendant personally and also by proceeding against the schedule ‘A & B’

¶47

OA. No.1470/2022

¶48

¶49

properties. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule

¶50

property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and other her assets are liable for all such amounts due

¶53

under the loan accounts.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶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

¶57

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

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

¶59

with this Final Order.

¶60

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶61

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

¶62

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th Day of August 2025].

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.1470/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Mrs. Raheesa Khatib, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Annexure	Particulars	Date
A1	APPLICANT EVIDENCE	--
A2	List of documents	--
A3	Application for agricultural credit	28.06.2006
A4	Simple mortgage deed	23.06.2006
A5	Sanction memorandum	28.06.2006
A6	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural	28.06.2006
A7	Letter of Revival	20.06.2009
A8	Letter of Revival	12.06.2010
A9	Letter of Revival	01.06.2013
A10	Letter of Revival	25.05.2016
A11	Letter of Revival	07.02.2019
A12	Letter of Revival	01.01.2022
A13	Demand notice	17.01.2022
A14	Legal notice	25.05.2022
A15	Statement of account in respect of account No.0512883002467	--

¶72

Sd/-

¶73

PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Smt. Uma H Desai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Uma H Desai

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

Punjab National Bank versus Kavita

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Amit Kumar

Central Bank of India versus M/S Fortress Packaging Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Lanvin Exports versus Canara Bank

Mrs Gayathri S and Another versus Tumkur Grain Merchants Cooperative Bank Limited

K R Nagesh versus Katta Radhakrishnaiah Nagesh