Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mangala Gowramma

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/1188/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DrT allowed an Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against defendants failing to repay an agricultural tractor loan, reducing the interest rate to 6% simple per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate to be drawn for an aggregate sum of Rs. 56,85,034/- with further interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing OA till realization, recoverable jointly, severally, and pers

Canara Bank versus Mangala Gowramma — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of January, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1188/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Head office at: No. 112, JC road, Bangalore – 560 002 Branch office at: No. 45, near NR circle, Malnad house, Hassan – 573 201 Hassan district

¶6

Represented by its senior manager Sri. Hanumanthappa H …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Mangala Gowramma W/o. late Nanjegowda Aged about 57 years

¶9

Sri. Rangaswamy S/o. late Nanjegowda Aged about 35 years

¶10

Smt. Janaki W/o. late C N Anand Age major

¶11

All are residing at: Chachapurada Koppalu Village, Shantigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk & District – 573 220 ...DEFENDANTS

¶12

OA-1188/2024

¶13

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : V Haridas Bhat Defendants : Ex part

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 56,85,034/- (Rupees Fifty Six Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand and Thirty Four Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed an tractor loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) for the purpose of purchasing a tractor and a trailor.

¶19

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

¶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 accounts as NPA.

¶21

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

¶22

OA-1188/2024

¶23

¶24

the amount due in the account.

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 13.08.2025.

¶26

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-14 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶27

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.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶30

claim as against the defendants?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶34

OA-1188/2024

¶35

¶36

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are 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).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.1188/2024 stands allowed,

¶40

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 56,85,034/- (Rupees Fifty Six Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand and Thirty Four Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and 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.

¶41

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 assets are liable for all such

¶42

OA-1188/2024

¶43

¶44

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶49

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

¶50

terms of this final order.

¶51

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶52

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

¶53

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶54

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

¶55

the Open Court, this the 30^th Day of January, 2026].

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶58

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶59

AW-1 Anjaneyulu D K, S/o. late Rammohan D K, Manager, of Applicant Bank

¶60

OA-1188/2024

¶61

¶62

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶63

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	28.03.2007	Loan application
A2	29.03.2007	Loan sanction letter
A3	29.03.2007	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans executed by defendant nos. 1 & 2 and late C N Ananda
A4	28.03.2007	Mortgage deed executed by defendant nos. 1 & 2 and late C N Ananda and registered in the office of the sub-registrar, Hassan, as document no. HSN-1- 10951-2006-07 and stored in C D no. HSND50
A5	20.03.2010	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2 and late C N Ananda
A6	05.10.2012	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2 and late C N Ananda
A7	30.06.2015	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2 and late C N Ananda
A8	27.02.2018	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2 and late C N Ananda
A9	01.12.2020	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2
A10	01.12.2020	Letter of revival executed by 3^rddefendant
A11	12.04.2022	Letter of revival executed by defendant nos.1 & 2
A12	12.04.2022	Letter of revival executed by 3^rddefendant
A13	12.04.2024	Legal notice got issued by the applicant bank to the defendants
A14	--------	Statement of account in respect of tractor loan account no. 0531856011771
Witness	Examined fo	r the Defendants: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments Ex	hibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶64

Sd/-

¶65

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mangala Gowramma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mangala Gowramma

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

S Rajeswari versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Kishan Mitrapal Chawla Dairy

Bank of India versus Ms Narmada Pipes

Ms Khajuria Constructions and Another versus State Bank of India

Raj Kumar Baniya versus State Bank of India

Smt Firoja Begum versus Indian Bank