Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mr Rajanna S B Gangadhara

DRT24 Jul 2026OA/1593/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this ex-parte debts recovery proceeding, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate. The defendants defaulted on a Kissan OD loan and failed to appear. The Tribunal admitted the bank's evidence regarding the loan, security, and default, allowing recovery including the principal and reduced interest at 6%. A recovery certificate was directed to be drawn for execution

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate allowed for Rs.23,43,276/- with 6% p.a. simple interest; recovery enforceable against defendants and schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Mr Rajanna S B Gangadhara — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of July 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

OA. No.1593/2025

BETWEEN:

Canara Bank

Holenarasipura Branch, BNS Complex, Mysore Road, Holenarasipura Town, Hassan District-573211.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Rajanna S B @ Gangadharan S/o.Shambegowda, R/at:Ontigiddakavalu Village, Doddakunchevu Post, H N Pura Taluk,

¶11

Hassan District-573211

¶12

Mr.Jayaram S S/o.Shambegowda, R/at:Ontigiddakavalu Village, Doddakunchevu Post, H N Pura Taluk, Hassan District-573211.

¶13

...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : M.V. Kini Law Firm Defendants : Exparte

¶16

¶17

: FINAL ORDER:

¶18

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.23,43,276/(Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Forty-Three Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy-Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶19

The Defendant No.1 as Borrower and Defendant No.2 as Guarantor availed Kissan OD Loan for Rs.3,15,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifteen Thousand Only)

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

¶24

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 17.10.2025.

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶29

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

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

¶34

¶35

are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is

¶36

well within the limitation.

¶37

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.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was

¶39

availed for Kissan OD loan 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).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.1593/2025 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum

¶42

of Rs.23,43,276/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Forty-Three Thousand

¶43

Two Hundred and Seventy-Six Only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization from the respective defendants, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, and allowed the same to

¶44

be recovered by proceeding the schedule properties. The schedule properties to the OA be the schedule properties to the Recovery Certificate.

¶45

¶46

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

¶47

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the respective defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all

¶48

such amounts due in respective loan accounts.

¶49

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶50

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

¶51

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

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,

¶54

¶55

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of July 2026].

¶56

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶57

¶58

ANNEXURES

¶59

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1: Sri. Vijay H.M., Manager of the applicant bank.

¶61

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶62

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1.	Loan Application 30.04.2007	A1
2.	Loan Sanction Memorandum 30.04.2007	A2
3.	Letter Evidencing Deposit of Title Deeds 30.04.2007	A3
4.	Agreement and Deed for Kissan OD 30.04.2007	A4
5.	Guarantee Agreement 30.04.2007	A5
6.	Letter of Revival 10.04.2010	A6
7.	Letter of Revival 24.04.2013	A7
8.	Letter of Revival 01.01.2016	A8
9.	Letter of Revival 01.10.2018	A9
10.	Letter of Revival 20.09.2021	A10
11.	Letter of Revival 15.09.2023	A11
12.	Legal Notice 21.03.2025	A12
13.	Statement of Account for A/c NO.0588897000002 along with Certificate U/s. 2A of the banker’s Book of Evidence Act, 1981

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mr Rajanna S B Gangadhara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mr Rajanna S B Gangadhara

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

Kaushelendra Pratap others versus Grihum Housing Finance Limited

Ms Lakshya Textiles Agency versus Uco Bank

Ms Maxx Metal Pvt. Ltd. and Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Gireesh Chand Garg versus Punjab National Bank

Rohit Jaiswal versus Canara Bank

Smt Alka and Another versus Canara Bank