Allowed

Canara Bank v. Shri Balaji Agro Industries

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/377/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, finding the claim sustained on account of defendants' ex parte non-appearance and uncontroverted documentary evidence. A recovery certificate is issued for Rs. 2,19,21,580/- with interest at 9.00% simple.

What did the court decide?

Granting of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 2,19,21,580/- with further interest at 9.00% p.a. (simple) recoverable from the defendants jointly, severally and personally.

Canara Bank versus Shri Balaji Agro Industries — 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

OA. No.377/2022

BETWEEN:

Canara Bank

Branch office at Koramangala, 348, 100 Ft Road,

¶9

St. John Medical College Road,

¶10

4^th Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru – 560034, Karnataka State, Rep. by its Chief Manager

¶11

And Principal Officer, Smt. G Sunitha … APPLICANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

M/s. Shri Balaji Agro Industries

¶14

A partnership firm rep. by its Partners:

¶15

a) Sri. Achut K B

¶16

Aged about 48 years

¶17

b) Sri. Pradeep V

¶18

Aged about 47 years

¶19

#205, 2^nd Floor, 5^th Cross, BEML 5^th Stage, R R Nagar, Bangalore – 560079

¶20

Sri. Achut K B No.401, 4^th Floor, Megha Maanay Omkar Nagar, Uttarahalli Main Road, Mylasandra, Bengaluru-560060

¶21

Sri. Pradeep V S/o. Sri. Venkateswaran R L Aged about 47 years No.1844, Khasbagh, 7^th Ward, Dodballapur, Karnataka-561203

¶22

OA. No.377/2022

¶23

¶24

Smt. Rani V W/o. Sri. Venkateswaran R L Major, No.1844, Khasbagh, 7^th Ward, Doddaballapur, Karnataka-561203

¶25

Smt. Gayathri G Major, W/o. Sri. Govindaraj 1504, Maruti Kunj, Sohna Road, Bhondsi, Gurgaon-122102 Haryana

¶26

Smt. Nirmala R Major, W/o. Sri. Raja Chenna Krishnan S No.204, Orchids Apartment 4th Main, 4th Cross, Ramanjaneya Nagar, Uttarahalli, Bangalore South, Subramanyapura, Bangalore-560061 ...DEFENDANTS

¶27

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Sri. T.P. Muthanna Defendants : Exparte

¶28

:FINAL ORDER:

¶29

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.2,19,21,580/- (Rupees Two Crore Nineteen Lakh Twenty One Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from

OA. No.377/2022

the Defendants.

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the open cash credit OCC/ODBD facility of Rs.1,50,00,000/- on 07.01.2020; additional loan/limit of Rs.30,00,000/- under MSME to meet working capital requirements; GECL loan of Rs.25,00,000/to build up current assets and to meet operational liability.

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

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.

¶37

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

OA. No.377/2022

16.12.2025.

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 A3 to A24 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶42

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.

¶43

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

¶44

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶45

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶46

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

¶47

OA. No.377/2022

¶48

¶49

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.

¶50

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.

¶51

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities were availed for 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).

¶52

In the result, OA.No.377/2022 stands allowed,

¶53

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.2,19,21,580/- (Rupees Two Crore Nineteen Lakh Twenty One Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty 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

¶54

OA. No.377/2022

¶55

¶56

loan accounts. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶57

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

¶58

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.

¶59

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.

¶60

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

¶61

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

¶62

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 DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶63

[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].

¶64

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.377/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Prabha Ganesh, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

Annexure	Particula	rs
A3	Copy of application form for 28.11.2019	loans to MSEs	dated
A4	Copy of the loan sanctio 07.01.2020	n intimation	dated
A5	Copy of the partnership let defendant Nos.2 and 3 dated	ter executed 20.01.2020	by the
A6	Copy of request for ove 20.01.2020	rdraft facility	dated
A7	Copy of Pronote for Rs. 20.01.2020	1,50,00,000/-	dated
A8	Copy of Common Hypothec Rs.1,50,00,000/- dated 20.0	ation Agreeme 1.2020	nt for
A9	Copy of letter of Undertaking dated 20.01.2020	Re: Loans/Ad	vances
A10	Copy of Guarantee Rs.1,50,00,000/- executed dated 20.01.2020	Agreement by defendant	for No.2
A11	Copy of Guarantee Rs.1,50,00,000/- executed dated 20.01.2020	Agreement by defendant	for No.3
A12	Copy of guarantee Rs.1,50,00,000/- executed dated 20.01.2020	agreement by defendant	for No.4
A13	Copy of the MODTD dated 18	.01.2020
A14	Copy of the application form Rs.30,00,000/- to MSMEs da	for additional l ted 09.06.2020	oan of
A15	Copy of the Offer lett Rs.25,00,000/- dated 09.06.	er for GEC 2020	L for

¶72

OA. No.377/2022

¶73

¶74

A16	Copy of the acceptance letter by defendants for GECL loan of Rs.25,00,000/- dated 09.06.2020
A17	Copy of the Undertaking letter for disbursement of GECL loan of Rs.25,00,000/- dated 09.06.2020
A18	Copy of the Pronote for Rs.25,00,000/- dated 15.06.2020
A19	Copy of the supplemental common hypothecation agreement for Rs.1,75,00,000/- dated 15.06.2020
A20	Copy of letter of undertaking Re: Loans/Advances dated 15.06.2020
A21	Copy of the legal notice dated 10.08.2021
A22	Copy of the statement of account certified under Bankers’ Book of Evidence Act., showing the outstanding liabilities under the OCC limit
	Copy of the statement of account certified under
A23	Bankers’ Book of Evidence Act., showing the outstanding liabilities under the GECL loan
	Copy of the statement of account certified under
A24	Bankers’ Book of Evidence Act., showing the outstanding liabilities under the CFITL loan

¶75

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Shri Balaji Agro Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Shri Balaji Agro Industries

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