Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Malleshappa

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/1615/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Original Application filed under the RDB Act, the Debts Recovery Tribunal granted a Recovery Certificate against four defendants. The bank, appearing ante, proved loan avails and defaults via uncontroverted exhibit. The Tribunal allowed the claim with interest reduced to 6%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.25,28,660.53 with 6% simple interest; recovery allowed jointly, severally, and against schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Sri Malleshappa — 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1615/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank, Holalur Branch, Sri. Maltesh Nilaya, Honnali Road, Holalur, Dist Shimoga, Karnataka-577216 Through its Senior Manager

¶8

Sri. Gairuboni Nagavamshee … APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. Malleshappa,

¶11

S/o, late Channabasappa Aged about 55 years, R/o, Haramghatta village, Holalur hobli, Shimogga dist. Karnataka-577216

¶12

2. Sri. Chandrashekar HC,

¶13

S/o, Late Channabasappa, Aged about 47 years, R/o, Haramghatta village, Holalur hobli, Shimogga dist. Karnataka-577216

¶14

Smt. Rathnamma

¶15

W/o, Shivannagowda, Aged about 59 years, R/o, Taraganahalli village, Honalli taluk, Shimogga dist, Karnataka-571314

¶16

OA. No.1615/2023

¶17

¶18

Smt. Shankramma W/o, chanappa, Aged about 57 years, R/o, Haramghatta village, Holalur hobli, Shimogga dist. Karnataka-577216

¶19

...DEFENDANTS

¶20

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶21

Applicant : M/s. VS Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶22

FINAL ORDER

¶23

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.25,28,660.53 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Sixty and Fifty Three Paise only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶24

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

¶25

i. Kissan overdraft facility of Rs.7,00,000/- on 15.05.2015

¶26

ii. Credit facility of Rs.5,00,000/- on 15.05.2015 iii. Credit facility of Rs.5,00,000/- on 17.12.2018

¶27

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed

¶28

OA. No.1615/2023

¶29

¶30

necessary loan documents apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶31

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.

¶32

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.

¶33

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 06.01.2025.

¶34

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶35

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.

¶36

OA. No.1615/2023

¶37

¶38

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶39

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

¶40

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶41

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

¶42

as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due

¶43

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

¶44

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶45

was availed for agriculture purpose and also that OA claim is

¶46

arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal

¶47

in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of

OA. No.1615/2023

6.00% (simple).

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.

¶52

In the result, OA.No.1615/2023 stands allowed,

¶53

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.25,28,660.53 (Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Sixty and Fifty Three Paise only) with further interest of 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants, 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 property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶54

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

¶55

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan

OA. No.1615/2023

account.

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶63

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

¶64

with this Final Order.

¶65

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶66

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

¶67

[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].

¶68

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶69

ANNEXURES

¶70

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶71

AW-1: Mr. Gairuboni Nagavamshee, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶72

OA. No.1615/2023

¶73

¶74

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶75

Annexure	Particulars	Date
A1	Application Form	15.05.2015
A2	Simple mortgage deed	14.05.2015
A3	Agreement and deed for kisan overdraft	15.05.2015
A4	Loan application and sanction letter	15.05.2015
A5	Simple mortgage deed	14.05.2015
A6	Agreement and deed of hypothecation for kisan credit card	15.05.2015
A7	Loan application and sanction letter	17.12.2018
A8	Simple mortgage deed	10.12.2018
A9	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans	17.12.2018
A10	Letter of revival	14.07.2017, 10.07.2020, 14.07.2017, 08.05.2020 01.12.2021
A11	Legal notice	13.03.2023
A12	True extract of statement of account pertaining to the defendants aforesaid loan account: 0561897000509, 0561883012065, 05615840013553	06.02.2018

¶76

Sd/-

¶77

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri Malleshappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Malleshappa

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