Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri.Babumiyan

DRT19 Jun 2025OA/512/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank seeking a Recovery Certificate against two defendants for an agricultural term loan defaulting to Rs.56.15 Lakhs. The defendants appeared ex-parte. The court reduced the interest rate to 8.00% simple and authorized recovery against schedule and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.56,15,540.03 plus 8% simple interest from filing date, recoverable from schedule properties and other assets jointly and severally.

Canara Bank versus Sri.Babumiyan — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of June, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.512/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Having its head office at 112, J C Road, Bangalore and Branches amongst others, one at Avinash building, Gunj Road, Near BDO office Cinema Lane, Chittapur, Gulbarga/Kalaburgi-585211 Rep. by Manager Sri. Siddaram Houde

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Babumiyan S/o. Hussainsab Sandoori Aged about 77 years R/o. Diggaon, Chittapur Taluka Kalburgi District – 585211

¶11

Mr. Abdul Khader @ Abdul Khadersab S/o. Babumiyan Aged about 50 years R/o. Diggaon Chittapur Taluka, Kalburgi District – 585211

...DEFENDANTS

OA. No. 512/2023

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Sri. Naveen Tao Defendants : Exparte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

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.56,15,540.03 (Rupees Fifty Six Lakh Fifteen Thousand Five Hundred Forty and Three Paise only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed term loan of Rs.5,00,000/- under the farm machinery loan on 04.09.2004.

¶20

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

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in

¶22

OA. No. 512/2023

¶23

¶24

default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶25

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.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 18.01.2024.

¶27

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 A17 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

OA. No. 512/2023

¶34

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶36

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 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 is also

¶37

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

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶39

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 8.00%

¶40

(simple).

¶41

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 liable to be allowed.

¶42

OA. No. 512/2023

¶43

¶44

In the result, OA.No.512/2023 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.56,15,540.03 (Rupees Fifty Six Lakh Fifteen Thousand Five hundred Forty and Three Paise only) with further interest of 8.00% 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 schedule properties. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶46

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 other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶47

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.

¶48

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

¶49

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶50

OA. No. 512/2023

¶51

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶52

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

¶53

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶54

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 19^th Day of June 2025].

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶57

ANNEXURES

¶58

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶59

AW-1: Sri. Siddaram Houde, Manager of the applicant bank.

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Annexure	Date	Particulars
A1	-	Affidavit Evidence
A2	-	List of Documents
A3	30.08.2004	Common application for agricultural credit-term loan
A4	01.09.2004	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans
A5	01.09.2004	Specimen signature card
A6	01.09.2004	Simple mortgage deed registered as document No.1656/2004-05 at the officer of sub registrar,chittapur
A7	28.07.2007	Letter of revival
A8	20.01.2010	Letter of revival
A9	01.01.2013	Letter of revival
A10	19.11.2013	Letter of revival
A11	16.11.2016	Letter of revival
A12	25.02.2019	Letter of revival

¶62

OA. No. 512/2023

¶63

¶64

A13	29.01.2021	Letter of revival
A14	02.11.2022	Legal notice with twopostal receipts
A15 & A16	-	Two postal department endorsed of onlinepostal tracking
A17	-	Bank statement A/c.No.1071856001206

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri.Babumiyan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri.Babumiyan

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

Formost Center versus Hdfc Ltd.

M/s Md Kaif Poultry Feed versus Indian Bank

Smt Yasmeen versus Icici Bank Limited

Maheswari a versus Punjab National Bank

Canara Bank versus Goudappa Hanumanthappa Huchareddy

Canara Bank versus Smt. Laxmibai