Allowed

Canara Bank v. Siddanaika

DRT25 Nov 2025OA/292/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank to seek issuance of a Recovery Certificate against a defaulting agricultural loan borrower. The tribunal reduced the claimed interest to 6% simple per annum and authorized recovery from personal assets and mortgage properties.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.35,22,975/- with simple interest at 6% p.a. from filing date, recoverable personally or against schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Siddanaika — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.292/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Kollegala Branch-000795, P.B. No.14, Atchams Mansion, 7-4-34, Southern Extn Road, Kollegala – 571440 Chamarajanagar District Rep. by its Senior Manager Sri. Somala Naik Sugali … APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Siddanaika S/o. Late Malanaika R/o. Palay Village, Kollegal Taluk, Chamarajanagar District - 571440 ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : Sri. Nandish N.J. Defendant : Exparte

¶11

:FINAL ORDER:

¶12

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

¶13

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs.35,22,975/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakh Twenty Two Thousand

¶14

OA. No.292/2022

¶15

¶16

Nine Hundred and Seventy Five only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed the agricultural term loan of Rs.5,58,000/- on 22.02.2006 for the purpose of purchase of Tractor.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 06.08.2024.

¶22

OA. No.292/2022

¶23

¶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 A14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the

¶26

contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶29

claim as against the defendant?

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶33

remains unrebutted as defendant 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also

¶34

OA. No.292/2022

¶35

¶36

proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well

¶37

within the limitation.

¶38

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶40

was availed for agriculture purpose and also that 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% p.a.(simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.292/2022 stands allowed,

¶42

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶43

of Rs.35,22,975/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakh Twenty Two Thousand

¶44

Nine Hundred and Seventy Five only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization

¶45

from the defendant, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed

¶46

the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendant personally and also by proceeding against the schedule properties.

¶47

The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to

¶48

OA. No.292/2022

¶49

¶50

the Recovery Certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant

¶53

personally and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

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

¶59

with this Final Order.

¶60

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶61

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of 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 25^th Day of November 2025].

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.292/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Affidavit Of Evidence
A2	List of documents
A3	Application of agricultural credit dated 21.02.2006
A4	Appraisal report for purchase of tractor and trailer dated 21.02.2006
A5	Memorandum of agreement for agriculture loan dated 22.02.2006 executed by defendants
A6	Letter evidencing deposit of title deeds on 22.02.2006 executed by defendant
	Letter of revival on 21.08.2008, 05.01.2011,
A7 to A11	02.01.2014, 27.12.2016 and 05.05.2019 executed by defendant
A12	Notice dated 07.12.2019
A13	Legal notice dated 19.09.2021, postal receipt and returned cover
A14	Certified statement of account along certificate

¶72

Sd/-

¶73

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Siddanaika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Siddanaika

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

Basil Co. versus Kerala Gramin Bank

Uco Bank versus Sh. Bachchan Kumar Singh

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Bhagwant Singh

Indu Kumari Pandey versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus M/S K. K. Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Mr. Praveen