Allowed

Canara Bank v. Chikkegowda

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/158/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an exparte proceeding under Section 19 RDB Act, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate. Due to the agricultural nature of the loans, interest was reduced to 6% simple p.a. from the filing date until realization, and the defendants were directed to repay jointly, severally, and personally.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate allowing recovery of Rs.30,45,869/- with 6% simple interest per annum from the filing date; Defendants liable jointly, severally, and personally.

Canara Bank versus Chikkegowda — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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 Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.158/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Having its head office at 112, J.C. Road, Bangalore-560002, And one of its branch office called Hassan Main Branch, at Kunigal Branch, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakuru District-572130 Rep. by its Manager, Sri. Raju K … APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Chikkegowda S/o. Late Chikekgowda Aged about 62 years,

¶9

Sri. Honnegowda S/o. Chikkegowda Aged about 37 years,

¶10

Both are Residing at Chikkegowdanapalya, Kothagere Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakuru District ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Sri. Mohamed Afroze Ahamed Defendants : Exparte

OA. No. 158/2022

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.30,45,869/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Nine only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed KCCS loan of Rs.1,25,000/- on 14.09.2007 for the purpose of crop production and Poultry loan of Rs.5,00,000/- on 18.03.2008.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

OA. No. 158/2022

¶21

¶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 accounts.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, he failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 12.10.2023.

¶24

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 A27 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants? ii) What order are to be passed?

¶28

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶29

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶30

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The

¶31

evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found

¶32

OA. No. 158/2022

¶33

¶34

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities

¶35

as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the

¶36

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The

¶37

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

¶38

11. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶39

was availed for agriculture purpose and also that OA claim is

¶40

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

¶43

issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶44

In the result, OA.No.158/2022 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶46

of Rs.30,45,869/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Sixty Nine only) with further interest of 6.00%

¶47

OA. No. 158/2022

¶48

¶49

p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the

¶50

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 defendants jointly, severally, personally and also by proceeding against the schedule properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶51

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally, personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶52

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶53

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

¶54

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶56

OA. No. 158/2022

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶60

[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].

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1: Devaraju H S, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Annexure	Date	Par	ticulars
A1	--	Applicant Evidenc	e
A2	--	List of documents
A3	14.09.2007	Loan application f	or KCCS loan
A4	14.09.2007	Sanction memora	ndum
A5	14.09.2007	Agreement Of Agricultural Loans	Hypothecation for
A6	14.09.2007	NF-482, Certificat obtained	e of loan papers
A7	12.08.2010	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the 1^st
A8	12.08.2010	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the 2^nd
A9	13.06.2013	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the 2^nd
A10	25.06.2014	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both the

¶66

OA. No. 158/2022

¶67

¶68

A11	23.02.2017	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the	2^nd
A12	20.06.2017	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A13	18.05.2019	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A14	21.04.2021	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the	2^nd
A15	18.03.2008	Loan application f	or Poultryloan
A16	18.03.2008	Sanction memora	ndum
A17	18.03.2008	Memorandum Agricultural loans	of Agreement	for
A18	18.03.2008	NF-373, Particul Poultryequipmen	ars of Hypotheca t	tion
A19	18.03.2008	NF-482,Certificat	e of loanpapers
A20	12.03.2008	Regd. Simple Mor	tgage Deed
A21	20.04.2010	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A22	18.03.2013	Letter of Revival defendant	executed by the	2^nd
A23	29.10.2015	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A24	24.10.2018	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A25	29.08.2020	Letter of Revival defendants	executed by both	the
A26		Statement of acc	ount in KCCS loan
A27		Statement of acc	ount in Poultryloa	n

¶69

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶70

Sd/-

Canara Bank v. Chikkegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Chikkegowda

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