Allowed

Canara Bank v. Ramappa Gangappa Lamani

DRT28 Oct 2025OA/695/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. Defending the claim was unrebutted as defendants appeared ex parte. The Tribunal granted recovery with reduced interest at 6% p.a. due to agricultural purpose.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,34,518.99 with interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing against defendants jointly, severally and personally and on schedule property.

Canara Bank versus Ramappa Gangappa Lamani — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 28^th Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.695/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Ramdurg Branch Ramdurg, Ramdurg Taluk, Dist. Belagavi-591123 Through its Senior Manager

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Ramappa Gangappa Lamani S/o. Ganggappa Lamani Aged about 63 years Having address at: Dadibhavi Tanda Village, Sulapur Post, Taluk Ramadurg, District Belgavi-591123

¶10

Mr. Jetteppa Maretammappa Hiregur S/o. Maretammappa Hiregur Aged about 75 years Having address at: Aribenchi Village, Taluk Ramadurg, District Belgavi – 591123

¶11

Mr. Rayanouda Basanagouda Patil S/o. Basanagouda Patil Aged about 60 years Having address at: Aribenchi village, Taluk Ramadurg, District Belgavi - 591123

...DEFENDANTS

OA. No.695/2024

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Mr. Venu K V 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.23,34,518.99 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Thirty Four Thousand Five Hundred Eighteen and Ninety Nine 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 defendants availed credit facility of Rs.5,00,000/- for agricultural purpose on 12.05.2015.

¶20

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

¶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.695/2024

¶23

¶24

default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account 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 accounts.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 17.10.2024.

¶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 A1 to A15 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

¶31

claim as against the defendants?

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

OA. No.695/2024

¶35

¶36

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶37

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 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.

¶38

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶40

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 6.00%

p.a.(simple).

OA. No.695/2024

In the result, OA.No.695/2024 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶46

of Rs.23,34,518.99 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Thirty Four

¶47

Thousand Five Hundred Eighteen and Ninety Nine Paise only) consisting of:

¶48

a. Rs.15,23,913.49 with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants No.1 and 2 ;

¶49

b. Rs.8,10,605.50 with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants No.1 and 3;

¶50

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 defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule to the OA be the schedule to the Recovery Certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable

¶53

OA. No.695/2024

¶54

¶55

for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶56

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶60

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

¶61

with this Final Order.

¶62

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶63

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

¶64

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶65

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 28^th Day of October 2025].

¶66

Sd/-

¶67

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶68

ANNEXURES

¶69

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶70

AW-1: Mr. Musafar Ahamed C, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶71

OA. No.695/2024

¶72

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Applicant evidence
A2	List of documents
A3	Loan application dated 10.02.2015
A4	agreement for agricultural advances dated 12.02.2015
A5	simple mortgage deed dated 10.02.2015
A6	Guarantee for agreement for agricultural advances dated 12.02.2015
A7	Letters of Revival dated 29.03.2020
A8	Letters of Revival dated 01.04.2022
A9	Loan application dated 25.08.2015
A10	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 25.08.2015
A11	Deed of Guarantee for Agricultural advances dated 25.08.2015
A12	Legal notice dated 10.02.2024
A13	True extract of statement of accounts
A14	True extract of statement of accounts
A15	Statement showing total outstanding liabilities of the defendant No.1

¶75

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶76

Sd/-

Canara Bank v. Ramappa Gangappa Lamani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Ramappa Gangappa Lamani

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

Canara Bank versus Aadinath Plastics

Canara Bank versus Harjit Singh

Bank of Baroda versus Sh. Sukhraj Singh

Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. versus Krishna Pratap Singh Chandel

Hdfc Bank versus Sunita Tayal

Sh Khusinder Singh versus Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank