Allowed

Canara Bank v. Siddappa Hunshikatti

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/1359/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application seeking a recovery certificate for a defaulted agricultural loan. The defendants, being absent in exparte, failed to rebut the evidence. The Tribunal reduced the agreed interest rate to 6.0% simple and directed recovery from the defendants jointly and severally.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 37,17,541/- plus interest at 6% simple from filing date till realization, recoverable jointly and severally from defendants against schedule and personal asset

Canara Bank versus Siddappa Hunshikatti — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of August, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1359/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Khade Bazar Branch 1^st Floor, Sri. Sai Ganesh Plaza Opp: Huns Talkies Khade Bazar, Belgaum-590001. Represented by its Manager and Principal Officer, Smt. Shilpa S Boragaon.

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Siddappa Hunshikatti S/o Sri. Rudrappa Hunshikatti, Turmari-591153, Bailhongal Taluk, Belgaum District.

¶10

Sri. Dundayya Vastrad S/o Sri. Veerabhadrayya Vastrad, Tolagi Village, Mangyankopp-591106, Khanapur Taluk, Belgaum District.

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : T.P. Muthanna Defendants : Exparte

¶14

2 1359/2023

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 37,17,541/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Forty One Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the Tractor Loan credit facility of Rs. 5,44,000/- from the applicant bank on 06.03.2006.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural loans, Registration certificates, Letter of Revival.

¶19

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶20

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.

¶21

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 07.11.2024.

¶22

3 1359/2023

¶23

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-13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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.

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶26

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

¶27

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶28

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶29

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. 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 Mortgage and hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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.

¶30

4 1359/2023

¶31

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶32

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

¶33

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural purpose and also that the 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% (simple).

¶34

In the result, OA.No.1359/2023, stands allowed,

¶35

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶36

37,17,541/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Forty One 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 amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶37

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

¶38

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶39

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which

¶40

5 1359/2023

¶41

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

¶42

order.

¶43

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

¶44

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶45

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

¶46

of this final order.

¶47

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶48

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

¶49

Rules, 1993.

¶50

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

¶51

Open Court, this the 27^th Day of August, 2026].

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(T. RAJESH)

¶54

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶55

ANNEXURES

¶56

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶57

AW-1: Sarath Das D, Authorized Officer of the applicant Bank

¶58

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶59

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	06.03.2006	Copy of the Application for agricultural Credit
A2	06.03.2006	Copy of the Loan Sanction Letter
A3	06.03.2006	Copy of Memorandum of Agreement for agricultural
		loans
A4	02.05.2006	Copies of Registration Certificates

¶60

6 1359/2023

¶61

A5	15.05.2008	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A6	18.02.2011	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A7	01.01.2014	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A8	27.07.2016	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A9	29.01.2019	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A10	29.01.2019	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A11	19.07.2021	Copy of the Letter of Revival
A12	22.11.2022	Copy of the Legal Notice
A13	--	Copy of the Statement of Account & memo of Calculation certified under Bankers Book of Evidence Act showing the outstanding liabilities under loan a/c No. 1390856001409

¶62

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶63

-Nil -

¶64

-Nil –

¶65

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Siddappa Hunshikatti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Siddappa Hunshikatti

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank