Allowed

Canara Bank v. R Nagesh Achary

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/354/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte original application for a Recovery Certificate, the Tribunal allowed the claim against defaulting borrowers for a loan account turned NPA. The relief was granted with interest reduced to 9% simple p.a.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 1,42,61,217 plus interest at 9% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing till realization, recoverable jointly and severally from defendants.

Canara Bank versus R Nagesh Achary — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of December, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.354/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Kodigehalli Branch, Main Road, Opp. Kodigehalli Milk Society, Dabaspet Road, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bangalore Rural – 561203 Rep. by it’s Manager, Sri. Pidugu Ashok … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. R. Nagesh Achary Proprietor of M/s. Prajwal Solar Systems S/o. V. Rudrachary Aged about 46 years R/at: 51/1. Marasandra Village, Doddatumkur Post, Hesaraghatta Hobli, Doddaballapura Road, Bangalore-560064

¶10

Sri. T G Manjunath S/o. T G Govindappa Aged about 44 years R/at. Madhure Hobli, Dodda Tumkuru Village & Post Doddaballapura ...DEFENDANTS

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Sri. C Vinay Swamy Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.354/2024

: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.1,42,61,217/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Two Hundred and Seventeen only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the housing loan of Rs.5,00,000/- on 19.11.2014; Term loan of Rs.39,00,000/- on 06.11.2014 and Open Cash Credit limit of Rs.15,00,000/- on 21.11.2014.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

OA. No.354/2024

¶20

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 04.04.2025.

¶23

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A24 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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.

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶26

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶27

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶28

OA. No.354/2024

¶29

¶30

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, as to the execution of loan documents 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 are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶31

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 to be allowed.

¶32

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities were availed for housing and business 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 9.00% (simple).

¶33

OA. No.354/2024

¶34

¶35

In the result, OA.No.354/2024 stands allowed,

¶36

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.1,42,61,217/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Two Hundred and Seventeen only) with further interest of 9.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from defendants, 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 the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets, including the schedule properties are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶37

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 accounts.

¶38

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.

¶39

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶40

OA. No.354/2024

¶41

¶42

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

¶43

with this Final Order.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of

¶45

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶46

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of December 2025].

¶47

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

ANNEXURES

¶49

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶50

AW-1: D V Chandra Teja, Officer of the applicant bank.

¶51

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶52

Annexure	Particulars	Date
A1	Application form	03.11.2014
A2	Housingloan agreement	19.11.2014
A3	Letter evidencing deposit of title deeds	21.11.2014
A4	Letter of revival	09.06.2020
A5	Deed of hypothecation bydefendant	21.11.2014
A6	Letter evidencing deposit of title deeds	17.10.2015
A7	Application form	27.08.2014
A8	Sanction letter	22.11.2014
A9	Cash credit agreement	22.11.2014
A10	Request for overdraft facilities	22.11.2014
A11	Pronote	22.11.2014

¶53

OA. No.354/2024

¶54

A12	Take deliveryletter to DPN	22.11.2014
A13	Letter of undertaking	21.11.2014
A14 & A15	Draft LEDTD to be used where additional limit is granted along with link letter	17.10.2015
A16	Cash credit agreement	20.10.2015
A17	Letter of revival	16.08.2017
A18	Letter of revival	09.06.2020
A19	Letter of revival	25.05.2023
A20 & A21	Legal notice and original postal receipts	28.12.2023
A22 to A24	Statements of accounts with certificate	-

¶55

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. R Nagesh Achary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. R Nagesh Achary

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri.Ramesh. B. Gowda

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ramraj Grewal

Canara Bank versus Mr. Bhanu Tiwari

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Sri.Bheemaraya. N. Bhosale

Mrs Praveena Pattanashetti versus Union Bank of India

Mr Mohammad Ali Saifuddin Navalgund versus Idbi Bank