Allowed

Canara Bank v. Maktumsaheb Dadeeper Jinabade

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/636/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate against a defaulting borrower. Based on unchallenged documentary evidence and an ex parte hearing, the Tribunal directed the issuance of a certificate for the outstanding principal and a reduced interest rate of 12% simple p.a., allowing the bank to pursue execution proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 23,05,258.80 plus further interest @12% p.a. (simple) from filing date till realization.

Canara Bank versus Maktumsaheb Dadeeper Jinabade — Execution and Attachment | 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 Presiding Officer OA.No.636/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Kudachi Branch Raibag Taluk, Dist. Belagavi – 591 311

¶6

Through its Branch Manager

¶7

Mr. Aniket Anand Alhat …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Maktumsaheb Dadepeer Jinabade S/o. Dadepeer Nuruddin Jinabade Age: 32 years Having address at: Near Government Hospital, Kudachi, Taluk Raibag, Dist. Belagavi, Karnataka – 591 311 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Venu K V Defendant : Ex parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

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

¶14

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993

¶15

2 OA-636/2024

¶16

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs. 23,05,258.80/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Five Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Eight and Paisa Eighty Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed the following credit facilities:

¶18

Working capital facility of Rs. 12,40,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Forty Thousand Only) on 04.02.2022.

¶19

Term loan of Rs. 11,35,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Only) on 04.02.2022.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan documents. 4. It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant 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 the amount due in the account.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 15.10.2024.

¶23

3 OA-636/2024

¶24

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-9 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶28

claim as against the defendant?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶32

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶33

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

¶34

4 OA-636/2024

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶38

In the result, OA.No.636/2024 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶39

Rs. 23,05,258.80/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Five Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty Eight and Paisa Eighty Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA.

¶40

ii) In the event of failure of the defendant to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to proceed against the defendant personally, and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶41

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶42

5 OA-636/2024

¶43

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

¶44

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶45

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

¶46

terms of this final order.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶48

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

¶49

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶50

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶51

the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of December, 2025].

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶54

ANNEXURES

¶55

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶56

AW-1: Aniket Anand Alhat, S/o. Anand Alhat, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶57

6 OA-636/2024

¶58

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶59

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Proposal dated 04.01.2022 issued by joint director, district industries center, Belgaum, ministry of micro, small and medium enterprises, government of India.
A2	Sanction letter dated 04.02.2022
A3	Composite agreement dated 04.02.2022
A4	Demand promissory note dated 04.02.2022 along with take deliverynote
A5	Letter of undertaking re: loans/advances dated 04.02.2022
A6	Legal notice both dated 21.10.2023
A7	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants aforesaid loan accounts no. 125001530014
A8	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendants aforesaid loan accounts no. 170003556703
A9	Statement showing total outstanding liabilities

¶60

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

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Maktumsaheb Dadeeper Jinabade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Maktumsaheb Dadeeper Jinabade

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