Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Chnadravva Yallappa Dombar

DRT19 Jun 2025OA/736/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an original application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against defendants who were absent. The court reduced the agreed interest rate to 8% p.a. despite the agricultural purpose of loans.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 21,63,025.15 with 8% p.a. simple interest; recovery against schedule property and personally.

Canara Bank versus Smt. Chnadravva Yallappa Dombar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of June, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.736/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Kulgod Branch Gokak Road, Mudalgi Taluk, Belagavi District

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Chnadravva Yallappa Dombar W/o. Yallappa Dombar Hunshyal P.Y.

¶9

Taluk Gokak, District Belagavi

¶10

Mr. Hanamanth Yallappa Dombar S/o. Yallappa Dombar Hunshyal P.Y. Taluk Gokak, District Belagavi

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Venu K.V. Defendants : Exparte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

1. The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶16

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶17

OA 736/2023

¶18

¶19

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶20

Rs.21,63,025.15/- (Rupees twenty one lakh sixty three thousand twenty five and paisa fifteen only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶22

I. KCC Loan of a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- (Rupees One lakh sixty thousand Only) which was later inhanced,

¶23

II. Agriculture loan limit of Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine lakhs Only) in which both the defendants No.1 & 2 are liable,

¶24

III. Agriculture Loan limit of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only).

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with simple mortgage deed, memorandum of agreement and agreement of hypothecation in favor of the applicant bank.

¶26

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

¶27

OA 736/2023

¶28

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 04.01.2024.

¶32

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-21 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶34

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶35

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶36

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶37

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶38

OA 736/2023

¶39

¶40

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶41

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶42

remains unrebutted as defendant 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 hypothecation and mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶43

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

¶44

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶45

are availed by defendants for agricultural purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed

¶46

OA 736/2023

¶47

¶48

rate, this Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @8% p.a.

¶49

In the result, OA.No.736/2023, stands allowed,

¶50

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶51

sum of Rs.21,63,025.15/- (Rupees twenty one lakh sixty three thousand twenty five and paisa fifteen only) consisting of:-

¶52

a) Rs.2,63,256.93(Rupees two lakhs sixty three thousand

¶53

two hundred fifty six and paise ninety three Only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple),

¶54

b) Rs. 14,98,898.86(Rupees fourteen lakhs ninety eight

¶55

thousand eight hundred ninety eight and paisa eighty six Only) with further interest @ 8% p.a. (Simple) in which defendant Nos.1 & 2 are jointly and severally to pay,

¶56

c) Rs.4,00,860.36(Rupees four lakh eight hundred sixty and paisa thirty six Only) with further interest @8% p.a. (Simple)

¶57

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same

¶58

OA 736/2023

¶59

¶60

to be recovered by proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶61

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendants,

¶62

jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable

¶63

to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶64

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶65

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

¶66

receipt of the order.

¶67

iv)The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶68

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

¶69

in terms of this final order.

¶70

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶71

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

¶72

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶73

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

¶74

PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

OA 736/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶80

AW-1: Harish yamanappa Gadinaik, Senior Manager, of Applicant

¶81

Bank.

¶82

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶83

The Exhibits are appended in this order.

¶84

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

¶85

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Smt. Chnadravva Yallappa Dombar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Chnadravva Yallappa Dombar

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