Allowed

Canara Bank v. Srinivasa Reddy and Another

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/2131/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This debt recovery tribunal allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank for issuance of a recovery certificate against two defendants who defaulted on a Rs. 20 lakh agricultural loan for sheep rearing. The claim was allowed with reduced interest at 6% p.a. due to the agricultural nature of the loan.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate to be drawn for Rs. 25,51,960/- with interest @6% p.a. (simple) to be recovered jointly and severally from defendants via schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Srinivasa Reddy and Another — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 27^th Day of August, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶5

Presiding Officer OA.No.2131/2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Dasara Hosahalli Branch, BEML Nagar, Kolar District, Karnataka – 563 132

¶8

Represented by its Chief Manager

¶9

Mr. U Ganesan …APPLICANT

¶10

AND:

¶11

Mr. Srinivasa Reddy S/o. Obala Reddy Aged about 50 years R/at: No. 50, Marandahalli Village, Mulbagal, Kolar District, Karnataka – 563 132

¶12

Smt. Bhagyamma W/o. Srinivasa Reddy Aged about 38 years R/at: No. 50, Marandahalli Village, Mulbagal, Kolar District, Karnataka – 563 132 ...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : S N Manjunath Defendants : Ex parte

OA-2131/2025

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs 25,51,960/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-One Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants are availed an agricultural loan of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only) to agricultural allied sheep rearing form.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loan, the defendants executed the necessary loan documents along with Simple mortgage deed.

¶20

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 accounts as NPA.

¶21

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.

¶22

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set ex parte on 25.03.2026.

¶23

OA-2131/2025

¶24

¶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 A-1 to A-9 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

¶29

claim 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 ex parte. 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 the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount

¶33

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶34

OA-2131/2025

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is

¶40

availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶41

In the result, OA.No.2131/2025 stands allowed,

¶42

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 25,51,960/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Fifty-One Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty 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 amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶43

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

¶44

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

OA-2131/2025

¶46

¶47

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶48

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

¶49

receipt of the order.

¶50

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

¶51

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

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

¶53

terms of this final order.

¶54

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶55

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

¶56

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of August, 2026].

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

(T. RAJESH)

¶60

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶61

ANNEXURES

¶62

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶63

AW-1 Sourabh Kumar, S/o Sushil Kumar, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Exhi bits	Date	Particulars
A1	14.03.2023	The loan application form
A2	20.03.2023	Letter of sanction
A3	20.03.2023	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans
A4	20.03.2023	Guarantee agreement

¶66

OA-2131/2025

¶67

¶68

A5	24.02.2023	Simple mortgage deed for agricultural advances
A6	24.02.2023	Memorandum of deposit of title deed along with translation copy
A7	03.10.2024	Office copy of legal notice
A8	---------	Postal receipt
A9	---------	Statement of account extract

¶69

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶72

Sd/-

¶73

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Srinivasa Reddy and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Srinivasa Reddy and Another

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank