Allowed

Canara Bank v. Basavaraj Revanappa

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/1432/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's recovery application against a defendant who failed to appear. The court issued a reduced recovery certificate allowing recovery of the principal and 6% p.a. simple interest against the schedule property and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.45,21,211.93 plus future interest at 6% p.a. simple, recoverable from schedule property and other assets.

Canara Bank versus Basavaraj Revanappa — Execution and Attachment | 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

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1432/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Shigli Branch, Shigli, Taluk Lakshmeshwar Dist Gadag-582212.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr.Basavaraj Revanappa Majjigudda S/o.Revanappa Majjigudda, Budhihal, Shirahatti Taluk, Dist. Gadag-582212 Karnataka.

¶11

...DEFENDANT

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Mr.Venu K.V Defendant : Exparte

¶14

: FINAL ORDER:

¶15

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 defendant for Rs.45,21,211.93 (Rupees Forty-Five Lakhs Twenty-One Thousand Two Hundred Eleven and Paisa Ninety-Three Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶16

2 OA No.1432/2024

¶17

The Defendant availed a sum of Rs.16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for the purpose of Agricultural (Crop production and allied activities) and The Defendant availed enhancement facility to Rs.19,80,000/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Eighty Thousand Only)

¶18

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

¶19

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account 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, service of summons on the defendant, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 04.03.2025.

¶22

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 A13 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶23

3 OA No.1432/2024

¶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 defendant?

¶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 defendant 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 security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant 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

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.

¶31

4 OA No.1432/2024

¶32

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% p.a.(simple).

¶33

In the result, OA.No.1432/2024 stands allowed,

¶34

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.45,21,211.93 (Rupees Forty-Five Lakhs Twenty-One Thousand Two Hundred Eleven and Paisa Ninety-Three Only) along with current and future interest 6% from the date of filing the application till the date of realization, from the Defendant, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶35

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

¶36

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due in loan accounts.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

5 OA No.1432/2024

¶40

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

¶41

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶42

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

¶43

this Final Order.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶45

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of August 2026].

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶48

ANNEXURES

¶49

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶50

AW-1: Sri.Chathalla Pramod, Officer of the applicant bank.

¶51

Sl. No	Description of Documents	Exhibits Number
1	Loan application dated 06.06.2016	A1
2	Sanction Memorandum dated 06.06.2016	A2
3	Agreement and Deed of Hypothecation for Kisan	A3
	Credit Card dated 06.06.2016
4	Simple Mortgage Deed registered 02.06.2016	A4

¶52

6 OA No.1432/2024

¶53

5	Application-cum-sanction for renewal and/or enhancement under Kisan credit card scheme dated 30.06.2017	A5
6	Sanction Memorandum dated 30.06.2017	A6
7	Letter of Renewal dated 30.06.2017	A7
8	Supplemental Agreement dated 30.06.2017	A8
9	Simple Mortgage Deed registered 03.06.2017	A9
10	Letter of Revival dated 30.06.2017	A10
11	Letter of Revival dated 28.07.2019	A11
12	Legal Notice dated 11.05.2024	A12
13	True Extract of Statement of Accounts	A13

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Basavaraj Revanappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Basavaraj Revanappa

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