Allowed

Canara Bank v. D H Jagannatha

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/1442/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's Original Application for a Recovery Certificate. Since defendants appeared ex parte, evidence was accepted unrebutted. The Tribunal ordered recovery of the principal plus interest at a reduced rate of 6% p.a., authorizing recovery from personal assets or schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs.30,97,215/- plus interest at 6% p.a. from filing date, recoverable from defendant No.1 personally or schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus D H Jagannatha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 31^st Day of July 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.1442/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Main Branch,

¶7

Sira, Sira Taluk-572137 Tumakuru district.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri.D.H. Jagannatha S/o. Late.Hanumanthappa, R/at.Devarahalli Village, Gowdagere Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶11

Miss D.J. Veena D/o. D.H.Jagannatha R/at.Devarahalli Village, Gowdagere Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶12

Miss. D.J. Vanishree D/o.D.H.Jagannatha, R/at.Devarahalli Village, Gowdagere Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶13

Miss.D.J.Deepthi D/o.D.H.Jagannatha, R/at.Devarahalli Village, Gowdagere Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶14

...DEFENDANTS

¶15

2 OA No.1442/2022

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : Sri. Mohamed Afroze Ahamed Defendants : Exparte

¶18

: FINAL ORDER:

¶19

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.30,97,215.00/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Fifteen Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

The Defendant No.1 availed a Farm Development Loan of Rs.24,00,000.00 (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Only) for the purpose of Construction of Ply House. The Defendants No.2, 3 and 4 are the Defendants are the Signatories to the Mortgage Deed. Hence made party.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

3 OA No.1442/2022

¶24

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.

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 01.04.2026.

¶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 A1 to A10 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 claim as against the defendants?

¶30

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

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 security interest

¶33

4 OA No.1442/2022

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for Farm Development Construction of Poly House, 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% p.a.(simple).

¶37

In the result, OA.No.1442/2022 stands allowed,

¶38

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

¶39

Rs.30,97,215.00/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Fifteen Only) along with current and future interest @ 6% from the date of filing the application till the date of realization, from the loan account of the defendant No.1 personally, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any,

¶40

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule

¶41

properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties

¶42

to the Recovery Certificate.

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

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 and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

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

¶51

Rules, 1993.

¶52

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31^st Day of July 2026].

¶53

6 OA No.1442/2022

¶54

ANNEXURES

¶55

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶56

AW-1: Sri. Qazi Azeem Akhtar, Branch Head of the applicant bank.

¶57

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶58

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Date	Exhibit Number
1.	Loan Application	24.11.2015	A1
2.	Sanction Letter	24.11.2015	A2
3.	Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loan	24.11.2015	A3
4.	NF-373, Particulars of Hypothecation	24.11.2015	A4
5.	Certificate of Loan Papers obtained	24.11.2015	A5
6.	The Registered Mortgage Deed	18.11.2015	A6
7.	The Copy of the Quotation	21.11.2015	A7
8.	Letter of Revival executed by the defendant	25.01.2018	A8
9.	Letter of Revival executed by the defendant	15.01.02021	A9
10.	Statement of Account in A/c No.0587883013045		A10

¶59

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. D H Jagannatha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. D H Jagannatha

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

Canara Bank versus Ms Kalka Packaging

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Fine Line Retails Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Ramappa G Khanagoudar

Mrs Azaz Fatima versus Hero Housing Finance Limited

M/s Pannalal Associates versus Anand Rathi Global Finance Limited

Ranjana Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited