Allowed

Canara Bank v. Chandrakanth

DRT22 Aug 2025OA/492/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the debtor recovery application filed by Canara Bank against two defendants, who were legal heirs of a deceased borrower. The claim for Rs. 54.56 lakhs was proved uncontroverted as defendants appeared ex parte. The Tribunal reduced interest to 6% for agricultural purposes and directed issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs. 54.56 lakhs with 6% simple interest; Recovery Certificate to be drawn and transferred for execution against schedule property and heirs' estate.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 22^ND Day of August, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.492/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank

¶7

Branch Office at Janata Bazar Building, Super Market Complex, Kalburgi- 585101

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Chandrakanth S/o. Late Shivasharanappa R/at Sangolgi (c)

¶11

Aland Taluk,

¶12

Kalaburgi District- 585104

¶13

Mr. Nagesh S/o. Late Shivasharanappa R/at Sangolgi (c) Aland Taluk

¶14

Kalaburgi District- 585104

¶15

...DEFENDANTS

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : Naveen Tao Defendants : Exparte

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶20

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶21

¶22

OA 492-2023

¶23

Rs.54,56,008/- (Rupees fifty four lakh fifty six thousand and eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶24

It is the case of the applicant that Late Sri. Shivasharanappa is the deceased borrower and defendants No.1 and 2 are the legal his heirs. The deceased borrower had availed the Agricultural Loan credit facilities of Rs.4,80,000/- (Rupees four lakh eighty thousand only) from the applicant bank.

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with title deeds, letter of revival and memorandum of agreement and mortgage in favor of the applicant bank.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they

¶29

¶30

OA 492-2023

¶31

failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 02.08.2024.

¶32

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-3 to A-16 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶34

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶35

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶36

OA claim as against the defendants?

¶37

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶38

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶39

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶40

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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of mortgage as claimed by

¶41

OA 492-2023

¶42

¶43

the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts.

¶44

The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶45

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶46

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

¶47

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed by the deceased borrower Late Sri. Shivasharanappa for agricultural purpose and also that OA claim

¶48

is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @6% p.a. (simple).

¶49

In the result, OA.No.492/2023 stands allowed,

¶50

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶51

sum of Rs.54,56,008/- (Rupees fifty four lakh fifty six thousand

¶52

and eight only) with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple),

¶53

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶54

personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and

¶55

OA 492-2023

¶56

¶57

received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same

¶58

to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶59

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants

¶60

are liable for the balance amount to the extent of estate they had inherited from the deceased borrower.

¶61

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶62

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

¶63

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

¶64

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶65

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

¶66

in terms of this final order.

¶67

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶68

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

¶69

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶70

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by

¶71

me in the Open Court, this the 22^ND day of August, 2025].

¶72

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 492-2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶77

AW-1: Satwant Singh, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶78

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶79

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	--	Applicant Evidence
A2	--	List of Documents.
A3	25.02.2005	Application for Agricultural Term Loan
A4	25.02.2005	Application for Purchase of tractor/power tiller
A5	25.02.2005	Memorandum of agreement for agriculture loan
A6	25.02.2005	Letter evidencing deposit of title deeds along with Schedule A and B
A7	01.01.2008	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A8	03.01.2011	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A9	01.01.2014	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A10	28.12.2016	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A11	26.12.2019	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A12	24.12.2021	Letter of Revival by legal heirs
A13	17.05.2022	Legal Notice along with postal receipt
A14		Postal Acknowledgement card duly served
A15	13.06.2022	Reply to the legal notice
A16		Bank Statement of A/c 0513856006566

¶80

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶81

-Nil -

¶82

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶83

-Nil -

¶84

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Chandrakanth

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Chandrakanth

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

Leelamma C S versus Federal Bank

Ajitha Reji versus Federal Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S Tirupati Associates, a Proprietary Concern Acting through Its Proprietor Shri Namdeo S/O Vishwanath Kadu

Smt Leelavathi versus Karnataka Bank Limited

Bank of India versus Amruth Hardware and Paints

Canara Bank versus Mahadevu