Allowed

Canara Bank v. v Sujatha

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/2132/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Tribunal allowed the Applicant bank's Original Application filed under Section 19 of RDB Act, 1993, against a defaulting farmer-proprietrix. Upon the defendant being absent ex parte and the bank proving the loan availed and subsequent default via documentary evidence, the court granted a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is allowed to recover Rs. 20,98,353/- with further interest of 11% p.a. (simple) from filing date till realization. A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn.

Canara Bank versus v Sujatha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.2132/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Branch office at: Dasarahosahalli Branch, At Dasarahosahalli-563115, Bangarpet Taluk, Kolar District Rep. by its Chief Manager Sri.U. Ganesan

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. V. Sujatha W/o. Sri. Ramamurthy Aged about 39 years, Proprietrix of M/s. Sujatha Hollow Brick Industry, Having its place of business at Sy.No.11/1, Kesaranahalli, Benganur village, S.G. Kote Post, Bangarpet Talukk, Kolar District-563114

¶10

R/at: No.22, Thammenahalli village, S.G. Kote Post, Bangarpet Taluk, Kolar District - 563162

¶11

...DEFENDANT

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Sri. V. Haridas Bhat Defendant : Exparte

¶14

:FINAL ORDER:

¶15

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶16

OA. No.2132/2024

¶17

¶18

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs.20,98,353/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Ninety Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Three 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 Term loan of Rs.22,50,000/- and Overdraft Cash Credit facility of Rs.2,50,000/- for the purpose of business.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendant executed necessary loan documents.

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, 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

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, he failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 26.11.2025.

¶24

OA. No.2132/2024

¶25

¶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 A9 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 claim as against the defendant?

¶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

¶33

remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

OA. No.2132/2024

¶37

¶38

within the limitation.

¶39

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the

¶40

issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is

¶41

liable to be allowed.

¶42

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities were availed for business 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 11.00% p.a.(simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.2132/2024 stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.20,98,353/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Ninety Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Three only) with further interest of 11.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization

¶45

from the defendant, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA.

¶46

ii) In the event of failure of the defendant to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to proceed against the defendant personally and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶47

OA. No.2132/2024

¶48

¶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

¶51

receipt of the order.

¶52

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

¶53

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶54

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

¶55

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1: Sri. Sourabh Kumar, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶62

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶63

Sl. Date Exhibit Description of Documents No. Number

¶64

OA. No.2132/2024

¶65

¶66

1	08.09.2022	Loan application submitted by the defendant	A1
2	13.09.2022	Loan sanction memorandum	A2
3	13.09.2022	Letter of Proprietorship executed by the defendant	A3
4	13.09.2022	Letter of Undertaking executed by the defendant	A4
5	13.09.2022	Deed of hypothecation executed by the defendant	A5
6	26.12.2023	Notice issued by the applicant bank to defendant	A6
7	31.05.2024	Recall notice issued by the applicant bank to defendant	A7
8	08.07.2024	Legal notice got issued by the applicant bank to defendant	A8
	--	Statement of account in respondent
9		of term loan account No.70006002835	A9

¶67

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. v Sujatha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. v Sujatha

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

Union Bank of India versus S S T Packaging Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Bank of India versus Ms Box Well Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Chandrashekhar Pundlik Jagtap

Bank of Baroda versus Anushka Jain Proprietor Ms Ur Choice

Canara Bank versus Mr R Markondaiah

State Bank of India versus Kavitha. N