Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Malagouda Kusanale

DRT24 Jul 2026OA/1996/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application for a Recovery Certificate filed by Canara Bank against multiple borrowers for agricultural and term loans totaling approx. Rs. 34.72 lakhs. Defendants appeared ex parte. Court approved the claim but reduced interest to 6% simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 34,71,934.53 plus 6% simple interest from filing date till realization, recoverable from mortgaged/schedule properties and personal assets.

Canara Bank versus Sri Malagouda Kusanale — Contract and Commercial Disputes | 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

¶4

OA.No.1996/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Raibag Branch, Sankpal Bldg Ankali Road, Raibag TQ Belgaum Dist-591317. Through its Chief Manager Mr. Sivakumar A. …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Malagouda Kusanale S/o Bhupal Kusanale Aged about 37 years, Suttatti Village, Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶9

Sri Kumar kanade S/o Shrimant Kanade, Aged about 44 years, R/o Nilaji Village, Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶10

Sri. Bhupal Kusanale S/o Tavanappa Kusanale, Aged about 67 years, R/o Suttatti Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶11

2 1996/2024

¶12

Shri Ajit Kusanale S/o Jinnappa Kusanale, Aged about Adult, R/o Suttatti Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶13

Shri . Rarisa J Kusanale S/o Jinnappa kusanale Aged about Adult, R/o Suttatti Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶14

Chalanadevi Kumara Baloji Aged about Adult, R/o Suttatti Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist-591217.

¶15

...DEFENDANTS

¶16

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶17

Applicant : Vignesh Shetty 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 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs. 34,71,934.53/(Rupees Thirty Four Lakh Seventy One Thousand Nine hundred Thirty Four and Paise Fifty three Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that the defendants availed the

¶21

3 1996/2024

¶22

following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶23

I. Agricultural Loan of a sum of Rs. 17,50,000/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) on 30.03.2016.

¶24

II. Term Loan of sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) on 30.03.2016.

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Agreement for Agricultural advances, Guarantee Agreement, Simple Mortgage Deed, Composite hypothecation agreement.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

Despite, taking out summons the defendants failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 17.07.2025.

¶29

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-11 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the

¶31

4 1996/2024

¶32

contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶33

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶34

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

¶35

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶36

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶37

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 facilities as stated in the OA, creation of Mortgage and Hypothecation as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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.

¶38

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities was

¶40

5 1996/2024

¶41

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).

¶42

In the result, OA.No.1996/2024, stands allowed,

¶43

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 34,71,934.53/- (Rupees Thirty Four Lakh Seventy One Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Four and Paise Fifty Three Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants jointly, severally and 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.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

6 1996/2024

¶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 July , 2026].

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH)

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1: Gajanan Shankar Kuri, Manager of the applicant Bank

¶61

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶62

Annexure	Date	List of Documents
A1	23.03.2016 23.01.2017	Application
A2	30.03.2016	Sanction letter
A3	15.04.2016	Agreement for Agricultural advances
A4	15.04.2016	Deed of Guarantee
A5	15.04.2016	Composite Hypothecation agreement
A6	02.02.2017	Guarantee agreement
A7	06.11.2018 03.11.2021	Letter of Revival
A8	08.03.2016	Simple Mortgage Deed

¶63

7 1996/2024

¶64

A9	12.04.2023	Legal Notice
A10	--	True Extract of Statement of Accounts pertaining to
		the defendants loan Accounts-05088320000877
A11	--	True Extract of Statement of Accounts pertaining to
		the defendants loan Accounts-05081490000039

¶65

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶66

-Nil -

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri Malagouda Kusanale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Malagouda Kusanale

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