Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. Satish Kumar K.N Prop M/S Gr Print Solutions

DRT30 Jun 2026OA/1482/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate under Section 19 of RDB Act 1993. The debtor defaulted on business loans and failed to appear. The tribunal reduced interest from the original claim to 12% p.a. and directed recovery of the reduced amount with interest from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate allowed for Rs. 26,11,366/- with 12% p.a. simple interest from date of filing. Cost of proceedings allowed. Interim application disposed of.

Canara Bank versus Sri. Satish Kumar K.N Prop M/S… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 30^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.1482/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank, Hombegowdanagar Branch, No 211/62, 11^th Cross Wilson Garden, Hombegowdanagar Bangalore-560027, Respresented By Its Manager

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Satish Kumar K.N. S/o Sri. Nagaraj, Aged About 44 Years, Proprietor, M/S. GR Print Solutions, No. 1239, Ground Floor, Rto Office, Btm 4^th Stage, Bilekahalli, Bangalore-560076,

¶10

...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Mohanadasa N Defendant : Exparte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶15

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶16

OA 1482/2023

¶17

¶18

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate

¶19

Rs26,11,366/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Eleven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant availed an business loan.

¶21

I. Business loan of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) purpose of purchasing machineries for his printing business.

¶22

II. Business loan of a sum Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) cash credit limit sanctioned to the defendant a cash credit.

¶23

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with Sanction letter, Agreement-cum-Deed Of Hypothecation,Pronote,Letter of undertaking.

¶24

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing

¶25

the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶26

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this

¶27

Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶28

OA 1482/2023

¶29

¶30

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 06.10.2025.

¶31

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-16 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶32

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the

¶35

OA claim as against the defendant?

¶36

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶37

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶38

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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of mortgage as claimed by

¶39

OA 1482/2023

¶40

¶41

the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts.

¶42

The liability of the defendant and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶43

Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶44

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶45

this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶46

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶47

are availed by defendant for business 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

¶48

@12% p.a. (Simple).

¶49

In the result, OA.No.1482/2023, stands allowed,

¶50

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶51

sum of Rs26,11,366/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Eleven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Six Only) with further interest @12% p.a. (Simple),from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally after giving credit to all the

¶52

amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA

¶53

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceedings against

¶54

OA 1482/2023

¶55

¶56

the defendants personally and their other assets including schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶57

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶58

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

¶59

receipt of the order.

¶60

iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this

¶61

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶62

iv) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of

¶63

in terms of this final order.

¶64

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶65

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

¶66

[Dictated to the Stenographer (ms), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 30th day of June, 2026].

¶67

Sd/(T. RAJESH)

¶68

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶69

ANNEXURES

¶70

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶71

AW-1: Rakesh jaiswal, Manager, of the Applicant Bank.

¶72

OA 1482/2023

¶73

¶74

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶75

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	11.06.2020	Application for term loan
A2	17.07.2020	Sanction letter
A3	18.07.2020	Agreement-cum-deed of Hypothecation
A4	18.07.2020	Pronote
A5	18.07.2020	Letter of undertaking
A6	17.07.2020	Application for OCC limit
A7	20.08.2020	Sanction letter
A8	20.08.2020	Request for overdraft facilities
A9	20.08.2020	Agreement-cum-deed of Hypothecation
A10	20.08.2020	Pronote
A11	20.08.2020	Letter of undertaking
A12	28.08.2021	Application for renewal of the OCC limit
A13	01.09.2021	Sanction memorandum
A14	01.09.2021	Letter of renewal
A15	10.01.2023	Certified account extract for term loan
A16	10.01.2023	Certified account extract Occ limit
Witness	Examined fo	r the Defendant: -Nil -
List of D	ocuments Ex	hibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶76

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri. Satish Kumar K.N Prop M/S Gr Print Solutions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. Satish Kumar K.N Prop M/S Gr Print Solutions

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Anugya Enterprises

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus M/s Maa Sharde Agritech

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Balajee Coal Depot

Manoj Kumar Sharma versus Punjab National Bank

Sri Ram Bhagat Sharma versus Icici Bank Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Niraj Marble and Tiles and Ors.