Allowed

Canara Bank v. Bheemappa H Sonvalkar

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/919/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for a recovery certificate of approximately Rs. 23.45 lakhs against three defendants. As defendants appeared ex parte, the court found the evidence sufficient and granted reduced interest of 6.00% p.a. for agricultural loans.

What did the court decide?

Issued a Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,45,394.74 at 6% simple interest; order realized jointly and severally and against schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Bheemappa H Sonvalkar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th Day of November, 2025

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.919/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Mudalagi Branch, TMC No 880, MallikarjunaNilaya, College Road, Mudalagi Taluk, Belgaum District. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶8

Mr. Sandip Suresh Dhawas … APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr.Bheemappa H Sonvalkar S/o.Hanamanthappa Sonawalkar Aged about 58 Years, R/at, No.1143, Vidyanagar, Mudalgi, Gokak Taluk, Belgaum Dist -591312.

¶11

Mr.Mahatesh Mahadevappa Kallali S/o.Mahadevappa, Major, Mudalgi, Mudalgi Taluk, Belgaum Dist -591312.

¶12

Mr.Sachin Govindappa Sonawalkar S/o. Govindappa, Aged about 38 Years, R/at, No.914/B, Karemmadevi Circle, Mudalgi, Belgaum Dist-591312. ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Sri. Prakasha Hegde K Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.919/2023

:FINAL ORDER:

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.23,45,394.74 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Four and Seventy Four Paisa 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 the agricultural term loan of Rs.9,00,000/- on 28.02.2018 and agricultural term loan of Rs.11,28,000/- on 16.03.2018.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents.

¶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 default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶23

OA. No.919/2023

¶24

¶25

Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 05.08.2024.

¶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 A3 to A15 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the

¶29

contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶31

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶32

claim as against the defendants?

¶33

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶35

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶36

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and

¶37

OA. No.919/2023

¶38

¶39

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 security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. 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.

¶40

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶41

issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶43

were 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%

¶44

p.a.(simple).

¶45

In the result, OA.No.919/2023 stands allowed,

¶46

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.23,45,394.74 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Ninety Four and Seventy Four Paisa Only) consisting of:

¶47

OA. No.919/2023

¶48

¶49

a. Rs.11,43,541.63/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Forty Three Thousand

¶50

Five Hundred Forty One and Sixty Three Paisa Only) in Loan Account No 05108230001665 with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant Nos. 1 and 2;

¶51

b. Rs.12,01,853.11/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Three and Eleven Paisa Only) in Loan Account No 05108010025801, with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendant Nos. 1 and 3;

¶52

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 properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶53

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

¶54

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

¶55

for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶56

OA. No.919/2023

¶57

¶58

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶59

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

¶60

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

¶61

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶62

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

¶63

with this Final Order.

¶64

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶65

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶66

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

¶67

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶68

ANNEXURES

¶69

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶70

AW-1: Mr. Sachin Kamble, Manager of the applicant bank.

¶71

OA. No.919/2023

¶72

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Affidavit Of Evidence
A2	List of documents
A3	LOAN APPLICATION DATED 28/02/2018
A4	Sanction Letter dated 28/02/2018
A5	Agreement for Agricultural Advances dated 28/02/2018
A6	Deed of Guarantee for Agricultural Advances dated 28/02/2018
A7	Loan Application dated 16/03/2018
A8	Sanction Letter dated 16/03/2018
A9	Agreement for Agricultural Advances dated 17/03/2018
A10	Deed of Guarantee for Agricultural Advances dated 16/03/2018
A11	Simple Mortgage Deed dated 23/02/2018
A12	Statement of Account in A/c 05108230001665
A13	Statement of Account in A/c 05108010025801
A14	Legal Notice dated 19/01/2023
A15	Postal Receipts

¶75

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Bheemappa H Sonvalkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Bheemappa H Sonvalkar

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 (Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Jagar @Jaggar Singh @Ujjagar Singh

State Bank of India versus Manjit Kaur

Ms Supreme Briquettes versus Hdfc Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Praveen

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Raja Ram Mishra