Allowed

Canara Bank v. Renukamma

DRT24 Jun 2026OA/2116/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application ex parte against the defendant. The court confirmed the loan availed, default, and liability but reduced the interest rate to 6% p.a. and ordered a recovery certificate to be issued for execution. Costs were awarded to the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs. 69,05,986/- with 6% p.a. interest; Recovery Certificate to be issued; costs awarded to applicant.

Canara Bank versus Renukamma — Money Laundering | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of June, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2116/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Branch Office at: Medikinhal, Channamallikarjuna Swmiji Kalyan Mantap Building, Kanakagiri Math Samsthan Main Road, Medikinhal, Medikinhal Village, Lingasugur Taluk, Raichur District-584124 Respresented By Manager …APPLICANT

¶6

AND:

¶7

Smt Renukamma, W/o. Sri. Shivabasappa, R/o. Nagarabenchi, Nagarabenchi Village, Raichur District-584124. ...DEFENDANT

¶8

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶9

Applicant : Veena R Rai Defendant : Exparte

¶10

FINAL ORDER

¶11

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been

¶12

filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act

¶13

1993 seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for

¶14

OA 2116/2024

¶15

¶16

Rs.69,05,986/- (Rupees Sixty Nine Lakh Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty Six Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that availed the defendant horticulture loan Rs,7,50,000/-(Rupees Seven Lakh Fifty Thousand Only)

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan document along with simple mortgage deed.

¶19

It is further contended that, the defendant despite availing the credit facility, 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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 04.08.2025.

¶22

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed

¶23

OA 2116/2024

¶24

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶28

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

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶32

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 mortgage as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. 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.

¶33

OA 2116/2024

¶34

¶35

11. Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this

¶36

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶37

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

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility

¶39

are availed by defendant 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 @6% p.a. (Simple).

¶40

In the result, OA.No.2116/2024, stands allowed,

¶41

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶42

sum of Rs. 69,05,986/- (Rupees Sixty Nine Lakh Five Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Six Only) with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple),from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant 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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶43

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, the defendant

¶44

personally and her other assets are liable to be proceeded

¶45

OA 2116/2024

¶46

¶47

against for the balance amount.

¶48

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶49

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

¶51

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

in terms of 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

¶56

of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

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

¶58

Sd/(T. RAJESH)

¶59

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1: Manjunath, S/o. Mr. Tondeppa, Officer, of the Applicant Bank.

¶62

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶63

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
A1	07.11.2008	Loan application sumitted by defendant

¶64

OA 2116/2024

¶65

¶66

A2	07.11.2008	Specimen signature cared submitted defendant	by
A3	07.11.2008	Sanction letter of the applicant
A4	07.11.2008	Memorandum of agreement for agricul loans executed by defendant	tural
A5	04.11.2008	Deed of simple mortgage executed defendant	by
A6	05.11.2011	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A7	12.07.2013	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A8	01.01.2016	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A9	01.12.2018	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A10	27.02.2019	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A11	30.08.2021	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A12	02.08.2024	Letter of revival executed by defendant
A13	13.10.2016	Notice issued to the defendant
A14	02.07.2021	Notice issued to the defendant
A15	19.11.2022	Notice issued to the defendant
A16		Statement of accounts in respect of horticu loan along with interest calculation sheet certificatr	lture and
Witness	Examined fo	r the Defendant: -Nil -

¶67

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶68

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Renukamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Renukamma

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