Allowed

Canara Bank v. Nanjamma

DRT14 Oct 2025OA/31/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act. The court, noting the defendants appeared ex parte, confirmed the loan default and liability. The recovery certificate was issued for the principal amount with interest reduced to 6.00% p.a. Pending interim applications were disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Issue of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 21,47,737/- with future interest at 6.00% p.a.; Allowed recovery from scheduleproperty; Recovery Certificate transferred to Recovery Officer.

Canara Bank versus Nanjamma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 14^th Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.31/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara bank JC Road Branch Bangalore – 560 002 Branch Office at: Kanakapura Ramanagar (D)

¶7

Rep: By Its Divisional Manager Mr. M S Anjan Kumar …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

1.Nanajamma W/o. Basavaraju Resident at: Tungani Village Kasabha Hobly Kanakapura Tq. Ramanagara District

¶10

Shivanna S/o. Ningaih Resident at: Tungani Village Kasabha Hobly Kanakapura Tq. Ramanagara District

¶11

Shankar S/o. Ningiah

¶12

OA. No.31/2022

¶13

¶14

Resident at: Tungani Village Kasabha Hobly Kanakapura Tq. Ramanagara District

¶15

Shivalinga Murthy S/o. Ningaih Resident at: Tungani Village Kasabha Hobly Kanakapura Tq. Ramanagara District ...DEFENDANTS

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : K Vijendra Rao Defendants : Ex parte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

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

¶20

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 21,47,737/- (rupees twenty one lakhs forty seven thousand seven hundred and thirty seven only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower. The Late borrower Ningiah

¶22

OA. No.31/2022

¶23

¶24

who, availed the following credit facilities:

¶25

Farm machinery loan of Rs. 5,40,000/- (Rupees five lakhs forty thousand Only) for the purpose to purchase of tractor and trailor.

¶26

The deceased borrower executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loans, interest, cost and charges. The Late borrower had also executed Simple Mortgage Deed dated 26.08.2005.

¶27

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

¶28

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 as against the defendants.

¶29

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 30.04.2024.

¶30

The applicant let in evidence through AW-3, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also

¶31

OA. No.31/2022

¶32

¶33

produced Exhibits A3 to A23 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶34

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the

¶35

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

¶36

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶37

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶38

claim as against the defendants?

¶39

ii) What orders 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

¶42

remains unrebutted as defendants remained ex parte. 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 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.

¶43

OA. No.31/2022

¶44

¶45

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶46

issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶47

Since the OA claim is arrived at by calculating agreed rate of interest, penal interest/default interest, which this Tribunal considers as on the higher side, pendentalite and future interest is awarded at reduced rate @ 6.00% p.a.

¶48

In the result, OA.No.31/2022 stands allowed,

¶49

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 21,47,737/- (rupees twenty one lakhs forty seven thousand seven hundred and thirty seven only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants to the extent of their inheritance of any estate form the deceased borrower Late Ningiah, 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 the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶50

OA. No.31/2022

¶51

¶52

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

¶53

the liability, the defendants to the extent of their inherited form

¶54

the deceased Ningiah is liable to the proceeds against for the balance amount.

¶55

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶56

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

¶57

receipt of the order

¶58

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

¶59

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶60

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

¶61

with this Final Order.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶63

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

¶64

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶65

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 14^th Day of October 2025].

¶66

Sd/-

¶67

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.31/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶72

AW-1: Anooja, worked as Manager of the applicant bank.

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Annexure	Date	Particulars
A3	25.08.2005	Application for agricultural credit NF 499
A4	26.08.2005	Loan sanction letter
A5	26.08.2005	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans
A6	03.09.2005	Particulars of vehicle/machinery/live stock
A7	26.08.2005	Simple mortgage deed
A8	03.05.2007	Death certificate ofNingiah
A9	15.07.2008	Letter of revival executed byNanjamma
A10	15.07.2008	Letter of revival executed byShivalinga Murthy
A11	15.07.2008	Letter of revival executed byShivanna
A12	15.07.2008	Acknowledgement of debt/security
A13	03.05.2011	Letter of revival
A14	04.03.2014	Legal heirs of revival letter
A15	02.01.2017	Letter of revival
A16	02.01.2017	Letter of revival
A17	02.01.2017	Letter of revival
A18	02.01.2017	Letter of revival
A19	05.09.2012	Notice issued to Ningiah
A20	10.042013	Notice issued to Ningiah
A21	29.11.2019	Legal notice to Ningiah and Nanjamma
A22	28.112019	Statement of account no. 0594856008048
A23	02.01.2020	Certificate under bankers book evidence act
Witness	Examined f	or the Defendants: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments E	xhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶75

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶76

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Nanjamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Nanjamma

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

Central Bank of India versus M/S Vishnu Traders

Punjab National Bank versus Ram Avtar Pal and Ors.

Icici Bank Limited versus Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India) versus Sri Sanjay Kumar Bharti

City Union Bank Limited versus Balaji Steel and Pipes

Canara Bank versus Mallikarjun