Allowed

Canara Bank v. Lalithamma and Others

DRT27 Nov 2025OA/2237/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed a recovery petition filed by Canara Bank against the legal heirs of a deceased borrower. Being an ex-parte hearing, uncontroverted evidence of loan availment, default, and mortgaged security was accepted. The Tribunal sanctioned a Recovery Certificate for the principal amount plus reduced interest at 6% simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 22,60,285.85 plus interest @6% p.a. (simple) against defendants 2 & 3 jointly/severally and on property; defendant 1 liable to extent of inherited estate.

Canara Bank versus Lalithamma and Others — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.2237/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank, Branch office at Tavarekere Branch, Taverekere, Sira Taluk- 572 139, Tumakuru District.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Lalithamma, W/o Late Srinivasamurthy, Aged about 55 years.

¶10

Sri Bhanu Prakash, S/o Late Srinivasamurthy, Aged about 41 years.

¶11

Sri. Pradeep. S/o Late Srinivasamurthy, Aged about 38 years.

¶12

All are residing at Cheelanahally Village, Tavarekere Post, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District- 572139.

¶13

...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Mohamed Afroze Ahamed Defendants : EXPARTE

OA 2237/2024

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 22,60,285.85 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Five and Paise Eight Five Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant bank, that the deceased borrower Srinivasa Murthy availed Kisan OD loan of Rs. 2 lakhs and KCCS loan of Rs. 16 lakhs. The deceased borrower and the defendants Nos. 2 & 3 are mortgagers to the loans availed. The defendants Nos. 1 to 3 are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower.

¶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 agreement and deed for Kisan OA and registered simple 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, Summons on defendants they failed to appear resulting

¶25

OA 2237/2024

¶26

¶27

the defendants being set exparte on 02.04.2025.

¶28

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-1 to A-18 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

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.

¶35

OA 2237/2024

¶36

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶40

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the 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 of 6.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.2237/2024, stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 22,60,285.85 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Five and Paise Eight Five Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants No. 2 & 3 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.

¶43

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

¶44

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants Nos. 2 & 3 jointly, severally & personally and their assets are liable for respective amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

OA 2237/2024

¶46

¶47

iii) The defendant No.1 being the Legal heir of the deceased

¶48

borrower is liable only to the extent of estate inherited by her from the deceased.

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶53

vi) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶54

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) Rules, 1993.

¶56

[Dictated to the Stenographer (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of November, 2025].

¶57

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶58

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1: Anuj Kumar, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶62

OA 2237/2024

¶63

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	10.05.2016	Application for kisan OD loan
A2	10.05.2016	Sanction memorandum
A3	10.05.2016	Agreement and deed for Kisan OD
A4	03.05.2016	Registered simple mortgage deed
A5	25.04.2019	Letter of revival
A6	07.10.2020	Letter of revival
A7	25.01.2018	Loan application for KCCS loan
A8	25.01.2018	Common application cum appraisal for KCCS loan
A9	25.01.2018	Sanction memorandum
A10	25.01.2018	Agreement and deed of hypothecation for kisan credit loan
A11	25.01.2018	Certificate of loan papers obtained
A12	25.01.2018	The copy of interest variation
A13	19.01.2018	Registered simple mortgage deed
A14	22.09.2020	Letter of revival
A15	2.09.2023	Acknowledgement of debt from legal heir
A16	23.06.2022	The copy of death certificate of deceased borrower Srinivasa murthy
A17	--	Statement of account in Kisan OD loan-A/c No. 0468897005459
A18	--	Statement of account in KCCS loan A/No. 468840022134

¶66

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶67

-Nil -

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Lalithamma and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Lalithamma and Others

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

Hdfc Bank versus Ashok Kumar

Canara Bank versus Amarjit Singh

Ajay Kashyap versus Piramal Capital

Ms Hi Tech Constructions versus State Bank of India

Hdfc Bank versus Lal Babu Singh

Isaac john gill versus Bank of Baroda