Allowed

Canara Bank v. Anjaneya Enterprises

DRT28 Jan 2026OA/1400/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. Despite the defendants appearing ex parte, the court found the bank's evidence uncontroverted regarding the loan availed, security creation, and defaults. The recovery is allowed with reduced interest at 12% simple p.a.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 20,25,888 with interest at 12% p.a. (simple) until realization, enforceable jointly, severally, and personally against the respondents.

Canara Bank versus Anjaneya Enterprises — Arbitration | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 28^th Day of January, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.1400/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Having its head office at: No. 112, JC road, Bangalore – 560 002 Branch office at: Amarjyothinagar Branch, Pattegarpalya Main Road, Bangalore

¶6

Represented by its Branch Manger Smt. Sruthi S …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

M/s. Anjaneya Enterprises Represented by its proprietor Sri. Venkatesh M No. 29, 1^st main road, Byraweshwaranagar, Nagarbhavi main road, Bangalore – 560 072

¶9

Sri. Venkatesh M S/o. Sri. Muniraju No. 28, 1^st main Pattegaralya, Bangalore – 560 079 ...DEFENDANTS

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : Babu Vishnu Defendants : Ex parte

¶12

2 OA-1400/2024

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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. 20,25,888/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶15

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed the following credit facilities:

¶16

Prime Ministers Employment Generation Program (PMEGP) loan of Rs. 19,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Only) for working capital requirements.

¶17

OCC loan of Rs. 4,75,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Only) for business purpose.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents.

¶19

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, 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.

¶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

3 OA-1400/2024

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 19.09.2025.

¶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-11 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 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 facilities as stated in the OA,

¶30

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶31

accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶32

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶33

4 OA-1400/2024

¶34

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶35

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

¶36

find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal

¶37

is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶39

availed for Business purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal of the view that OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 12.00%(simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.1400/2024 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of

¶42

Rs. 20,25,888/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Eight

¶43

Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally, after giving credit to all

¶44

the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA.

¶45

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

¶46

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶47

jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for balance

¶48

amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶49

5 OA-1400/2024

¶50

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶51

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

¶52

receipt of the order.

¶53

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

¶54

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶55

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

¶56

terms of this final order.

¶57

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶58

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

¶59

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

¶60

the Open Court, this the 28^th Day of January, 2026].

¶61

Sd/-

¶62

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

6 OA-1400/2024

¶64

ANNEXURES

¶65

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶66

AW-1: Kuchanapalli Supriya, D/o. Reginad, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶67

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶68

Exhibit	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	Application form for loans to micro small & medium enterprises (MSMEs) dated 26.07.2022
A2	Sanction memorandum dated 26.07.2022
A3	Request for OD facilities dated 26.07.2022
A4	Cash credit agreement dated 26.07.2022
A5	Pronote dated 26.07.2022
A6	Take delivery letter to DPN dated 26.07.2022
A7	Agreement cum dated of hypothecation dated 26.07.2022
A8	NF 373 particulars of vehicles/Machinery/Equipment hypothecated dated 26.07.2022
A9	Guarantee covering letter & guarantee agreement dated 26.07.2022
A10	Legal notice dated 13.05.2024
A11	Legal notice dated 13.05.2024
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Anjaneya Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Anjaneya Enterprises

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S First Engineer

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ram Sidhari

Icici Bank Limited versus Shaikh Ayub

Jitendra Singh versus Punjab National Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Sucha Singh

Canara Bank versus Manga Singh Aulakh