Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. Hanumareddi Appanna Meti

DRT24 Jun 2026OA/1654/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against a defendant who appeared ex parte. The Tribunal confirmed the defaulted credit facilities and reduced the interest rate to 6%.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 33,69,717/- plus 6% simple interest; proceeds recoverable from defendants personally and from schedule property.

Canara Bank versus Sri. Hanumareddi Appanna Meti — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 24^th Day of June, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶5

OA.No.1654/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Branch Office at: Saundatti, Belgaum District-591126. Represented by its Branch Manager, Sajeev Mathew.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. Hanumareddi Appanna Meti S/o Aappanna, Aged about 63 yeas, R.at. Kagadal Village, Saundatti Taluk, Belagavi District.

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : M.R. Shashidhar Defendants : 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 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 33,69,717/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Seventeen Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till

¶16

¶17

realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶19

I. KCCS Loan of a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- was renewed and enhanced to Rs. 5 Lakhs and again the same was renewed and enhanced to 11,00,000/- Lakhs.

¶20

II. Kisan O.D. limits of sum of Rs. 7,25,000/-

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with Sanction Memorandum Letter, Simple Mortgage Deed, Supplemental Agreement.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendant failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶23

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.

¶24

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 04.11.2025.

¶25

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced

¶26

¶27

Exhibits A-1 to A-26 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendant?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

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 the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the 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% (simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.1654/2022, stands allowed,

¶40

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.33,69,717/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Seventeen only) consisting of:

¶41

a. Rs.20,24,484 /- with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) in respect of the KCCS Loan from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants.

¶42

b. Rs.13,45,233/- with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) in respect of Kisan O.D. from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants to pay personally, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against schedule property. Schedule Properties to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶43

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for the amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶44

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings 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

¶48

transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶49

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

¶50

of this final order.

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

Rules, 1993.

¶54

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

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH)

¶57

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶58

ANNEXURES

¶59

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1: Suresh Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank

¶61

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶62

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	04.07.2011	Simple Mortgage Deed
A2	05.07.2011	Loan Application for credit card
A3	05.07.2011	Sanction Memorandum Letter
A4	05.07.2011	Agreement of Hypothecation for Agricultural Loans

¶63

¶64

A5	20.06.2014	Simple Mortgage Deed
A6	21.06.2014	Loan Application for credit card
A7	21.06.2014	Sanction letter
A8	21.06.2014	Supplemental Agreement
A9	21.06.2014	Letter of renewal
A10	07.07.2017	Registered Simple Mortgage Deed
A11	10.07.2017	Application for renewal
A12	10.07.2017	Supplemental Agreement
A13- A16	--	Letter of revivals dated 21.06.2014, 04.07.2016, 23.08.2017, 01.06.2020
A17	03.10.2013	Loan Application
A18	03.10.2013	Registered Simple Mortgage Deed
A19	03.10.2013	Agreement and Deed for Kisan OD
A20- A22	--	Letter of Revival dated 10.09.2016, 07.03.2019, 27.01.2022
A23 -A24	--	The Notices dated 04.07.2022, 12.06.2022,
A25-A26	--	Certified Statement of Account Extracts

¶65

Witness Examined for the Defendant: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶66

-Nil -

¶67

-Nil –

¶68

Sd/-
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri. Hanumareddi Appanna Meti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. Hanumareddi Appanna Meti

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

State Bank of India versus Haja Majmudeen Abdul Razak

Union Bank of India versus M/s Pallavi Pharma

Ms Joysri Enterprises versus Indian Bank

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited versus Haji Mohammad Sultan Sofi

Ellaquai Dehati Bank versus Ghulam Rasool Mir

Keshav Prasad Choubey versus Shubham Housing Development Finance Company Limited