Allowed

Canara Bank v. Santhosh Kumar H M

DRT25 Sept 2025OA/877/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant bank's Original Application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate, awarding recovery of principal plus interest at 10% p.a. as the Defendant appeared ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 22,31,121.39 with further interest at 10% p.a. (Simple) recoverable against Defendant personally and schedule property. Cost of proceedings awarded to Applicant.

Canara Bank versus Santhosh Kumar H M — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 25^th Day of September, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.877/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Basavani Branch Shivamogga District-577432

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Santhosh Kumar H M (Borrower) S/o HD Manjunath R/at”: Holekoppa, Thirthahalli Taluk, Shimoga District-572125 ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : Pai & Anand Law Associates Defendant : Exparte

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶13

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.22,31,121.39 (Rupees twenty two lakh thirty one thousand

¶14

one hundred twenty one and paisa thirty nine only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till

¶15

¶16

OA 877-2024

¶17

realization from the Defendant.

¶18

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

¶19

I. MSE Loan of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) which was later enhanced from time to time,

¶20

II. MSE loan limit of Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lakh Only), and

¶21

III. MSE Loan limit of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakh Only)

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with supplemental agreement, agreement of hypothecation and letters of renewal in favor of the applicant bank.

¶23

It is further contended that, the defendant 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.

¶24

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate

¶25

for the amount due in the account.

¶26

¶27

OA 877-2024

¶28

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 06.02.2025.

¶29

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-30 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶32

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶33

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶34

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶35

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶36

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 undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found

¶37

OA 877-2024

¶38

¶39

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

¶40

of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶41

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶42

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

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶44

are availed by defendant for Business purpose and also that OA

¶45

claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this

¶46

Tribunal, in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest @10% p.a.(Simple).

¶47

In the result, OA.No.877/2024, stands allowed,

¶48

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶49

sum of Rs.22,31,121.39 (Rupees twenty two lakh thirty one

¶50

thousand one hundred twenty one and paisa thirty nine only)

¶51

OA 877-2024

¶52

¶53

with further interest @10% p.a. (Simple),

¶54

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

¶55

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 the defendant personally including his other assets and schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶56

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶57

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

¶58

receipt of the order.

¶59

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

¶60

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶61

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

¶62

in terms of this final order.

¶63

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶64

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

¶65

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶66

[Dictated to the Stenographer (JV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by

¶67

me in the Open Court, this the 25^th day of September, 2025].

¶68

S/d (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA 877-2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶73

AW-1: Mr. Santosh Kumar, Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶74

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶75

The documents are appended in this order.

¶76

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

¶77

Sd/ (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Santhosh Kumar H M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Santhosh Kumar H M

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

Union Bank of India versus Sukumar Mohan

State Bank of India versus Rahul

Canara Bank versus Sgr Infratech Solution

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Bairaiah Since Dead by His Lrs and Others

Canara Bank versus Sri. S C Ravikumar Prop of Dodmane Poultry Farm

Canara Bank versus Devegowda Eregowda