Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. Pramod K

DRT30 Oct 2025OA/75/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Tribunal allowed the Recovery Certificate application filed by Canara Bank against the borrowers and guarantor. The court noted the defendants' default and lack of appearance, accepting the bank's documentary evidence. Interest was reduced to 12% p.a. during the pendency of the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate for Rs. 36,99,938 with 12% p.a. simple interest from filing date till realization is issued and transferred for execution against the respondents jointly and severally.

Canara Bank versus Sri. Pramod K — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of October, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.75/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Kunjibettu Branch Udupi District-576101

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Pramod K

¶9

S/o. Sri. K Narayan Shanbhugue Proprietor of L N Hardware

¶10

Smt. Suvarna Pramod W/o Sri. Pramod K

¶11

Both are R/at: No.5-1-72 B “Shreyas” Behind Veerabhadra Kalabhavan Colony Kannimulky, Udupi- 576101 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M.S. Vinayaka Defendants : Exparte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶16

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶17

¶18

OA 75-2023

¶19

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate Rs.36,99,938/- (Rupees thirty six lakh ninety nine thousand nine hundred thirty eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant No.1 is the borrower and defendant No.2 as guarantor availed the OC Loan credit facilities of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs only) from the applicant bank.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with demand promissory note, demand notice and letter of Revival in favor of the applicant bank.

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

¶25

OA 75-2023

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 26.03.2025.

¶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 A-1 to A-17 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 the proof affidavit.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶31

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶35

undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found

¶36

OA 75-2023

¶37

¶38

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities as stated in the OA, creation of hypothecation 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

¶39

of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶40

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 to be allowed.

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶42

are availed by defendants for OCC loan 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 @12% p.a.(Simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.75/2023, stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶45

sum of Rs.36,99,938/- (Rupees thirty six lakh ninety nine

¶46

thousand nine hundred thirty eight only) with further interest

@12% p.a. (Simple),

OA 75-2023

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶51

jointly severally and 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 proceedings against their other assets including the schedule. Schedule to the OA be

¶52

the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶53

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶57

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

¶58

in terms of this final order.

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶60

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

¶61

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶62

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30^th day of October, 2025].

¶63

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶64

OA 75-2023

¶65

¶66

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶67

AW-1: B Girish Kumar, Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particu	lars of Documents
A1	02.01.2017	Original loan app	lication form
A2	06.01.2017	Loan Sanction le	tter
A3	06.01.2017	Original Compos executed	ite hypothecation ag	ree	ment
A4	06.01.2017	Original guarant	ee agreement
A5	30.12.2019	Original demand	promissory note
A6	09.03.2020	Original acknowl	edgement of debt
A7	18.09.2020	Original link lette	r
A8	02.02.2022	Demand Notice
A9		Original postal defendant	acknowledgement	of	1^st
A10		Original postal Hardware	acknowledgement	of	L N
A11		Original postal defendant	acknowledgement	of	2^nd
A12	14.02.2022	Original letter of	revival
A13	03.09.2022	Legal notice issu	ed to defendants
A14		Original postal defendant	acknowledgement	of	1^st
A15		Original postal defendant	acknowledgement	of	2^nd
A16	17.09.2022	Original reply giv	en by defendant
A17		Statement of Ter	m loan account

¶70

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

¶71

-Nil -

¶72

-Nil -

¶73

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri. Pramod K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. Pramod K

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Kamaljit Singh

Ms General Trading Company versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Piara Singh

Ms R S Belvedere versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited

Ms Parwati Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. and others versus Bank of Baroda

Standard Chartered Bank versus M/s Nanma Marketing Pvt. Ltd.