Allowed

Canara Bank v. H. Lingappa

DRT29 Aug 2025OA/1753/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DTI allowed an Original Application for a recovery certificate against two defendants who availed Kisan loans. The defendants were absent. The court allowed the claim for the principal sum and reduced interest at 6% per annum due to agricultural purpose, enabling enforcement against defendants and mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 28,30,116 plus 6% p.a. simple interest from filing date; enforcement against defendants and schedule property.

Canara Bank versus H. Lingappa — 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.1753/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Gundlupet Branch KPS Complex, Ooty Mysuru Road, Gundlupet – 571111 Chamaraja Nagar District Rep. by its Branch Manager and Power of attorney Holder Sri. Deveesh Kumar Prasad … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. H. Lingappa S/o. Late Basappa and Late Ankada Kalamma Aged about 73 years

¶10

Ms. H.L Shobha D/o. Sri. H. Lingappa Aged about 39 years

¶11

Both are residint at Hangalapura, Gundlupet, Chamarajanagara District- 571109 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Sri. Veeresh Kumar Javali M C Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.1753/2023

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.28,30,116 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Sixteen only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed Canara Kisan Overdraft of Rs.7,50,000/- on 04.11.2015 and Kisan credit card scheme loan of Rs.6,43,000/- on 05.11.2015.

¶19

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

¶20

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 account as NPA.

¶21

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶22

OA. No.1753/2023

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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 A18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the

¶28

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

¶34

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The

¶35

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

¶36

OA. No.1753/2023

¶37

¶38

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities

¶39

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

¶40

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶41

11. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶42

was availed for agriculture purpose and also that OA claim is

¶43

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%

¶44

(simple).

¶45

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.

¶46

13. In the result, OA.No.1753/2023 stands allowed,

¶47

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶48

of Rs.28,30,116 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Sixteen only) with further interest @6.00%p.a

¶49

OA. No.1753/2023

¶50

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

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.

¶54

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

¶55

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶56

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

¶57

OA. No.1753/2023

¶58

¶59

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

¶60

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

¶61

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶62

[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].

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶67

AW-1: Sri. Kailash Mishra, Divisional Manager of the applicant bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Annexure	Particulars		Date
A1	Common Application Form Agricultural Loan	for	16.10.2015
A2	Sanction memorandum		05.11.2015
A3	Agreement and deed for kisan executed bydefendant No.1	OD	05.11.2015
A4	Simple mortgage deed		04.11.2015
A5	Letter of revival		04.01.2018
A6	Letter of revival		01.01.2021
A7	Legal notice		24.05.2017
A8	Postal receipt		-
A9	Acknowledgments		--
A10	Statement of account		--
A11	Common application form agricultural loan	for	16.10.2015

¶70

OA. No.1753/2023

¶71

¶72

A12	Sanction memorandum	05.11.2015
A13	Agreement and deed hypothecation for kisan credit card	05.11.2015
A14	Simple mortgage deed	04.11.2015
A15	Consent Deed of mortgage	02.03.2016
A16	Letter of revival	04.01.2018
A17	Letter of revival	01.01.2021
A18	Statement of statement	--

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. H. Lingappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. H. Lingappa

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