Allowed

Canara Bank v. Nagaraj Dyamanna

DRT4 Mar 2026OA/1708/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application filed by Canara Bank seeking a recovery certificate against a defaulting agricultural loan borrower. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal allowed the application but directed the recovery certificate to be issued with a reduced simple interest rate of 6.00% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate to be drawn and transferred for execution against the defendant and schedule property for Rs.29,33,816.47 plus further interest at 6.00% p.a. (simple).

Canara Bank versus Nagaraj Dyamanna — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 4^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.1708/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Shigli Branch Shigli, Taluk Lakshmeshwar Dist. Gadag – 582210 Through its Sr. Branch Manager Mr. Elvis D’ Souza

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Nagaraj Dyamanna Hunagund S/o. Dyamanna Hunagund Age: 33 years Having address at: At & Post: Ward No.1, Shigli, Shirahatti Taluk, Dist. Gadag, Karnataka – 582210

¶11

...DEFENDANT

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Mr. Venu K.V. 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 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for

¶16

OA. No.1708/2024

¶17

¶18

Rs.29,33,816.47 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakh Thirty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixteen and Forty Seven Paisa only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant availed credit facility of Rs.12,00,000/- towards agricultural purpose (crop production) on 26.07.2016, which was enhanced to Rs.17,00,000/on 05.09.2017.

¶20

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 over the Schedule property.

¶21

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.

¶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

OA. No.1708/2024

¶24

¶25

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 28.01.2025.

¶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 A13 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

¶30

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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The

¶34

OA. No.1708/2024

¶35

¶36

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.

¶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

¶39

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 6.00% p.a.(simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.1708/2024 stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶42

of Rs.29,33,816.47 (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakh Thirty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Sixteen and Forty Seven Paisa only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA

¶43

till the realization from the defendant, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendant personally and also by proceeding against the schedule

¶44

OA. No.1708/2024

¶45

¶46

property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶53

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

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶55

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

¶56

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 4^th Day of March 2026].

¶57

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.1708/2024

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

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

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1	Loan application dated 26.07.2016	A1
2	Sanction memorandum dated 26.07.2016	A2
3	Agreement and Deed of hypothecation for kisan credit card dated 26.07.2016	A3
4	Simple mortgage deed registered 25.07.2016	A4
5	Application cum sanction for renewal and/or enhancement under kisan credit card scheme dated 05.09.2017	A5
6	Sanction memorandum dated 05.09.2017	A6
7	Letter of renewal dated 05.09.2017	A7
8	Supplemental agreement dated 05.09.2017	A8
9	Simple mortgage deed registered 12.07.2017	A9
10	Letter of revival dated 05.0.2017	A10
11	Letter of revival dated 14.06.2019	A11
12	Legal notice dated 20.06.2024	A12
13	True extract of statement of accounts pertaining to the defendant aforesaid loan account No.0570840011692

¶65

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Nagaraj Dyamanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Nagaraj Dyamanna

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

Idbi Bank versus Sri Avijeet Ghosh and Anr.

Aamner Multi Food Processing versus Central Bank of India

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S S.S. Sandhu Trading Company

M Rajshekar versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Basavaraj Ningappa

Bank of Baroda versus Sri Sai Ram Print Tec