Allowed

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/568/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank seeking a Recovery Certificate against two defendants. The defendants failed to appear and were set ex parte. The Tribunal found the loan availed and default proven based on documentary evidence, allowing recovery of the principal and reduced interest of 6% per annum upon registration of the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate allowed for Rs. 22,34,947.00 plus interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from date of OA till realization against defendants jointly, severally, and personally.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.568/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank, Hassan Main Branch, at NR Pura Road, Hassan City, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District- 573 201, Represented by its Senior Manager, Sri Hanumanthappa H.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Manjegowda, S/o Thimmegowda, Aged about 63 years.

¶10

Smt. Tejaswini, D/o Manjegowda, Aged about 34 years,

¶11

Both are residing at, Melagodu Village, Melagodu Post, Dudda Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District, Pin- 573 220.

¶12

...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : V. Haridas Bhat Defendants : EXPARTE

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under

¶17

section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance

¶18

OA 568/2024

¶19

¶20

of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 22,34,947.00 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Thirty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed KCC loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only) and kissan Overdraft loan facility of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only).

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

Despite, summons on defendants, they failed to appear resulting the defendants being set exparte on 27.09.2024.

¶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-3 to A-20 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

OA 568/2024

¶28

¶29

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.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶32

as against the defendants?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

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, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the 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.

¶36

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶37

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

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶39

OA 568/2024

¶40

¶41

availed for Agriculture purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by

¶42

calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.568/2024, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶45

22,34,947.00 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakh Thirty Four Thousand Nine

¶46

Hundred Forty Seven Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally & personally, 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 schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly,

¶49

severally & personally and their assets are liable for amounts due under the respective loan accounts.

¶50

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶54

OA 568/2024

¶55

¶56

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

¶57

of this final order.

¶58

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

¶59

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

¶60

Rules, 1993.

¶61

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

¶62

Sd/- (T. RAJESH)

¶63

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶64

ANNEXURES

¶65

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1:Muralidhar, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶68

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
		KCC loan of Rs. 3,00,000/-
A3	13.01.2015	Loan application submitted by the 1^stdefendant
A4	13.01.2015	Loan sanction letter
A5	13.01.2015	Agreement and deed of hypothecation for kisan credit card loan executed by the 1^stdefendant
A6	06.01.2015	Mortgage deed executed by the defendants and registered in the office of Sub-registrar, hassan as document No. HSN-1-08475-2014-15 and stored in CD NO. HSND261
A7	07.09.2017	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A8	25.06.2019	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A9	21.06.2022	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A10	25.11.2019	Request letter for conversion of KCC loan into a term loan
		II- Kisan OD loan of Rs. 5,00,000/-

¶69

OA 568/2024

¶70

¶71

A11	13.01.2015	Loan application submitted by the 1^stdefendant
A12	13.01.2015	Loan sanction letter
A13	13.01.2015	Agreement and deed for kisan overdraft executed by the 1^stdefendant
A14	06.01.2015	Mortgage deed executed by the defendants, registered in the office of the Sub-registrar, hassan as Document No. HSN-1-8474-2014-15 and stored in CD NO. HSND261
A15	16.08.2017	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A16	13.08.2020	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A17	14.07.2022	Letter of revival executed by the 1^stdefendant
A18	31.01.2024	Legal notice got issued by the applicant bank to the defendants
A19	--	Statement of account in respect of KCC account No. 0531847013383
A20	--	Statement of account in respect of Kisan OD loan account No. 531897000257

¶72

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

¶73

-Nil -

¶74

-Nil -

¶75

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Jagar @Jaggar Singh @Ujjagar Singh

State Bank of India versus Manjit Kaur

Ms Supreme Briquettes versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Praveen

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Raja Ram Mishra