Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Suvarna Pramod.K Prop Suvarna Sanitary

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/153/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank against two proprietrix/proprietor defendants. An exparte order was passed following default in repayment of term and OCC loans. The Tribunal granted a Recovery Certificate for the principal amount with interest capped at 12% p.a. for execution proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs.28,78,938/- including interest @12% p.a. granted against personal assets and schedule property; cost of proceedings awarded to applicant.

Canara Bank versus Smt. Suvarna Pramod.K Prop… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of August, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.153/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Kunjibettu Bank Udupi District-576101

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Suvarna Pramod K W/o Sri. Promod K Proprietrix of Suvarna Sanitary

¶9

Sri. Pramod K S/o. Sri. K Narayan Shanbhugue Proprietor of L N Hardware

¶10

Both are R/at: No.5-1-72 B “Shreyas” Behind Veerabhadra Kalabhavan Colony Kannimulky, Udupi-576101

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M.S. Vinayaka Defendants : Exparte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶16

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶17

¶18

OA 153-2023

¶19

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.28,78,938/- (Rupees twenty eight lakh seventy eight thousand nine hundred thirty eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is a Proprietrix of Defendant No.2. The Defendant No.1 availed the following credit facilities from the erstwhile Syndicate Bank which later got amalgamated with Canara Bank:-

¶21

I. Term Loan of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) and

¶22

II. OCC loan limit of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen only).

¶23

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with composite hypothecation, undertaking letter, guarantee agreement and letters of revival in favor of the Applicant Bank.

¶24

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.

¶25

¶26

OA 153-2023

¶27

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶28

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

¶29

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 05.07.2024.

¶30

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-31 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶31

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered

¶32

the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶35

OA claim as against the defendants?

¶36

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶37

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶38

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶39

OA 153-2023

¶40

¶41

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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the

¶42

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the

¶43

amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶44

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, this

¶45

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

¶46

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶47

are availed by defendants for Business 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 @12% p.a.(simple).

¶48

In the result, OA.No.153/2023, stands allowed,

¶49

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶50

OA 153-2023

¶51

¶52

sum of Rs.28,78,938/- (Rupees twenty eight lakh seventy eight

¶53

thousand nine hundred thirty eight only) consisting of:-

¶54

a) Rs.3,89,200/- (Rupees three lakh eighty nine thousand

¶55

two hundred Only) with further interest @12 p.a. (Simple)

¶56

and

¶57

b) Rs.24,89,738/- (Rupees twenty four lakh eighty nine thousand seven hundred thirty eight Only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple),

¶58

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 defendants personally and their assets along with the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶59

ii) 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

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

¶62

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶63

OA 153-2023

¶64

¶65

iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶66

in terms of this final order.

¶67

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶68

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

¶69

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

¶70

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶71

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶72

ANNEXURES

¶73

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶74

AW-1: Girish Hejmady, Branch Manager, of the Applicant Bank.

¶75

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶76

The Documents are appended in this order.

¶77

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶78

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Smt. Suvarna Pramod.K Prop Suvarna Sanitary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Suvarna Pramod.K Prop Suvarna Sanitary

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