Allowed

Canara Bank v. Ms Favourite Foods

DRT28 Nov 2025OA/1610/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.1610/2023, the Tribunal allowed the Bank’s application for a Recovery Certificate of Rs. 26,06,194.24 with reduced interest (8% simple) against the defendants jointly, severally, and personally due to default and defaulting evidence.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs. 26,06,194.24 with 8% simple interest from filing date, recoverable from defendants jointly, severally and personally via schedule property.

Canara Bank versus Ms Favourite Foods — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 28^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1610/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank, SME Kundapura Branch, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi Dist- 576201, Through its Divisional Manager, Sri. Jai Prakash Singh.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

M/s. Favourite Foods, Prop: Smt. Vijayashree, Basabail Mutt, Bidkalkatte, Molahalli Village, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi Dist, Karnataka- 576222.

¶10

Smt. Vijayashree, D/o. ShankaraMogaveera, Basabail Mutt, Bidkalkatte, Molahalli Village, Kundapura Taluk, Udupi Dist, Karnataka- 576222.

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : VS Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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

¶16

section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance

¶17

OA 1610/2023

¶18

¶19

of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 26,06,194.24 (Rupees Twenty Six Lakh Six Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Twenty Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed working capital limit of Rs.18 lakhs and Rs. 3,67,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Sixty Seven Thousand Only).

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with demand promissory note and mortgage deed.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶23

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.

¶24

Despite, summon the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 20.03.2024.

¶25

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-15 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

OA 1610/2023

¶27

¶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 defendants?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants 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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶37

OA 1610/2023

¶38

¶39

availed for business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by

¶40

calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 8.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.1610/2023, stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶43

26,06,194.24 (Rupees Twenty Six Lakh Six Thousand One Hundred Ninety Four and Paise Twenty Four Only) with further interest @8.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & 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 proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶44

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

¶45

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally & personally and their assets are liable for respective amounts due under the respective loan accounts.

¶46

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

OA 1610/2023

¶50

¶51

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

of this final order.

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

Rules, 1993.

¶57

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 28^th Day of November, 2025].

¶58

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶59

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: Vinod Kumar C K, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A3	Request for overdraft facilities executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank 18.12.2018
A4	Cash credit agreement executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 18.12.2018
A5	Demand promissory note executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 18.12.2018
A6	Letter of undertaking re: loans/ advances executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 18.12.2018
A7	Letter of revival executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 13.03.2020

¶65

OA 1610/2023

¶66

¶67

A8	Letter of renewal executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 13.03.2020
A9	Letter of undertaking re: loans/ advances executed by defendant No.1 (Represented by proprietor defendant No.2) in favour of applicant bank dated 05.07.2019
A10	Deed of hypothecation re: machinery agreement executed by defendant No.1 dated 05.07.2019
A11	Letter of revival executed by D No.1 (represented by D2) in favour of applicant bank 13.03.2020
A12	Mortgage deed dated 24.03.2015
A13	Demand/ recall notice dated 9.08.2022
A14	True extract of statement of account pertaining to the defendant’s loan account- 4339261000058
A15	True extract of statement of account pertaining to the defendant’s loan account- 4339766000025

¶68

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶69

-Nil -

¶70

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶71

-Nil -

¶72

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶73

PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Ms Favourite Foods

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Ms Favourite Foods

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

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Vasantha Mary

Canara Bank versus Girithimappa G D

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus M/S Rapido Fashions

Ms Sandhya Granites versus Indian Overseas Bank

Ms Basaveshwara Rice Industries versus State Bank of India

Garudachala Properties Private Limited versus Capri Global Capital Limited