Allowed

Canara Bank v. Babu

DRT24 Oct 2025OA/527/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal, in an ex parte proceedings, allowed the applicant bank's recovery application against defaulting borrowers. The court confirmed the loan facility, security creation, and defaults were proven. It reduced the interest rate to 6% simple p.a. and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate against the scheduled properties for the claimed amount.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 50,88,336/- plus 6% simple interest from filing, executable against schedule properties and personal assets.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.527/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank 112, JC road, Bangalore Branches at: Janata Bazar Building, Super Market Complex, Kulburgi – 585 101

¶7

Represented by its Senior Manager Mr. Satwant Singh …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Babu @ Babasab S/o. Hanumanth Aged About 52 Years R/o. Kerur Village, Aland Taluk, Gulbaraga District – 585 236

¶10

Mr. Mallkanna S/o. Hanumanth Aged about 47 Years R/o. Kerur Village, Aland Taluk, Gulbaraga District – 585 236

¶11

Mr. Laxman S/o. Hanumant Aged about 57 Years R/o. Kerur Village, Aland Taluk, Gulbaraga District – 585 236 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

OA-527/2023

¶13

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Naveen Tao Defendants : Ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 50,88,336/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed an farm machinery loan of Rs. 5,70,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Seventy Thousand Only) to purchase tractor and trailer under the farm machinery loan on 23.02.2006.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents along with simple mortgage deed.

¶20

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

¶21

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶22

OA-527/2023

¶23

¶24

the amount due in the account.

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 14.08.2024.

¶26

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-1 to A-12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶30

claim as against the defendants?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application 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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶34

OA-527/2023

¶35

¶36

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶37

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.527/2023 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 50,88,336/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Six Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶42

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

¶43

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶44

OA-527/2023

¶45

¶46

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance

¶47

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶48

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

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

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of October, 2025].

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: Sri. Bhoom Reddy, S/o. Gopal Reddy, working as Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶63

OA-527/2023

¶64

¶65

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶66

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	30.01.2006	Application for agricultural term loan towards a/c. no. 0513856007901
A2	14.02.2006	Memorandum of agreement for agriculture loan
A3	31.01.2006	Simple mortgage deed registered as doc. 1986/2005-06, sub-registrar, Aland
A4	15.01.2009	Letter of revival
A5	01.10.2010	Letter of revival
A6	03.08.2013	Letter of revival
A7	30.07.2016	Letter of revival
A8	13.06.2018	Letter of revival
A9	08.04.2021	Letter of revival
A10	17.05.2022	Legal notice along with postal receipt
A11	04.10.2022	Department of posts-delivery status of articles
A12	-------	Bank statement of a/c. 0513856007901

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶68

Sd/-

¶69

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Babu

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

Punjab National Bank versus Raghbir Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Guzar Ahmad Wani

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Prasanta Ghosh

Ms North Malda Rice Mill and Anr. versus West Bengal Gramin Bank

Canara Bank versus Sannasiddappa Hanumappa Vaddar

Canara Bank versus Mayamma