Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mr. Malatesh Gurulingappa Kale

DRT29 May 2026OA/116/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tribunal allowed an Original Application for a recovery certificate against two defendants for an agricultural loan default. The claim was unopposed due to ex parte absence. Interest was reduced to 6% p.a. full costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,14,465.52 plus 6% p.a. simple interest from filing date; recovery from defendants joint and several liability and scheduled property.

Canara Bank versus Mr. Malatesh Gurulingappa Kale — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 29^th Day of May, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.116/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Lakshmeshwar Branch Sindhur Building, Pampa Circle, Lakshmeshwar, Dist. Gadag-582116 Through its Senior Manager Mr. Ravi Garg

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Malatesh Gurulingappa Kale S/o. Gurulingappa Kale Age:54 years Having address at: At 7 Post: Ramageri Village, Shirahatta Taluk, Dist. Gadag, Karnataka – 582116

¶10

Mr. Sudhindra Basappa Betageri S/o. Basappa Betageri Age: 41 years Having address at: At & Post: Ramageri Village, Shirahatti Taluk, Dist. Gadag, Karnataka - 582116

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Sri. Venu K V Defendants : Exparte

OA. No.116/2024

: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.23,14,465.52 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Five and Fifty Two Paisa only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed crop production loan of Rs.3,00,000/- towards agricultural purpose on 20.01.2009.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendants executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶20

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.

¶21

OA. No.116/2024

¶22

¶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 defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 30.04.2025.

¶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 A1 to A7 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶32

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

¶33

OA. No.116/2024

¶34

¶35

undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility 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.

¶36

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural 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%

¶38

p.a.(simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.116/2024 stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶41

of Rs.23,14,465.52 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Fourteen

¶42

OA. No.116/2024

¶43

¶44

Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Five and Fifty Two Paisa only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants, after giving credit to all the

¶45

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

¶46

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶47

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶48

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

¶49

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶50

OA. No.116/2024

¶51

¶52

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶53

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

¶54

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶55

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29^th Day of May 2026].

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER ANNEXURES

¶58

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶59

AW-1: Sri. Rakesh Shankar Gawade, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
	Interview cum Assessment form for short term
1	loan and sanction memorandum dated 20.01.2009	A1
2	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 20.01.2009	A2
3	Simple mortgage deed dated 21.01.2009 along with legal opinion dated 21.01.2009	A3
4	Deed of Guarantee of agreement for agricultural advances dated 21.01.2009	A4
5	Letter dated 18.01.2021 acknowledging the liability	A5
6	Legal notice dated 17.11.2023	A6
	True extract of statement of accounts
7	pertaining to the defendant aforesaid loan accounts	A7

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mr. Malatesh Gurulingappa Kale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mr. Malatesh Gurulingappa Kale

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

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Aby Abraham

RRaju Kalidoss versus Canara Bank

Sajan S versus Yes Bank

Vinod Kumar Gupta versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Marvel Metals Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Mr B S Girisha versus Dcb Bank Limited