Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mallikarjuna Shankrappa Bolashetti

DRT31 Dec 2025OA/838/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank for a Recovery Certificate against the defendant for a defaulted agricultural loan, permitting execution against scheduled properties and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued allowing recovery of Rs. 30,20,015.70 plus 6% simple interest from personal assets and scheduled properties.

Canara Bank versus Mallikarjuna Shankrappa… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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.838/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Nargund Branch TMC Road, Vasavi Kalyanamantapa Building, Tehsil, Nargund, Gadag District – 582 207

¶6

Represented by its Senior Manager Sri. Manohar Shejal …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Mallikarjuna Shankarappa Bolashetti S/o. Shankarappa Aged about 30 years Residing at: Near Fatte Mazzid, Arban Village, Nargund Taluk, Gadag District – 582 207 ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : M Mohan Rao Defendant : Ex parte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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

¶13

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶14

Rs. 30,20,015.70/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Twenty Thousand And

¶15

OA-838/2024

¶16

¶17

Fifteen and Paisa Seventy Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

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

¶19

Crop loan facility of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Only) for the purpose of crop cultivation.

¶20

Agricultural loan facility of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Only) for the purpose of repairs and repayment of agricultural equipment’s.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan document along with Simple mortgage deed.

¶22

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.

¶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

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 24.10.2024.

¶25

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.

¶26

OA-838/2024

¶27

¶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 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 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

¶35

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. 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 are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶38

Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

OA-838/2024

¶40

¶41

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶42

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.838/2024 stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs 30,20,015.70/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Twenty Thousand And Fifteen and Paisa Seventy Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, 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 the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶45

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

¶46

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant, personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶47

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.

¶48

OA-838/2024

¶49

¶50

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

¶51

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

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

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

(T. RAJESH)

¶61

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶62

ANNEXURES

¶63

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶64

AW-1: Mr. Ravi, S/o. Mr. Thammaiah, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶65

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶66

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	11.08.2015	Loan application
A2	11.08.2015	Agreement and deed of hypothecation for Kisan credit card executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank

¶67

OA-838/2024

¶68

¶69

A3	06.08.2015	Simple mortgage deed executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A4	------	Statement of account
A5	18.03.2017	Loan sanction letter
A6	18.03.2017	Agreement and deed of hypothecation for Kisan overdraft executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A7	16.03.2017	Simple mortgage deed executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A8	06.12.2023	Legal notice and postal endorsement
A9	------	Statement of account

¶70

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶71

-Nil -

¶72

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶73

-Nil -

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mallikarjuna Shankrappa Bolashetti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mallikarjuna Shankrappa Bolashetti

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