Allowed

Canara Bank v. Nagappa

DRT27 Apr 2026OA/2708/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank for issuance of a recovery certificate. The court found the defendants' case unrebutted due to ex parte proceedings, upheld the proof of debt and mortgage, and granted recovery of the principal amount with reduced interest. A recovery certificate was ordered to be transferred for execution.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for aggregate sum of Rs. 28,56,938/- with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple) from filing date until realization, executable against schedule property and other assets joint

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of April, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.2708/2024

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Sindhanur Branch Sindhanur Taluk Raichur District- 584128

¶6

…APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Nagappa S/o Eshappa K

¶9

Sri. Sharanabasava K @ K. Sharanappa S/o. Eshappa K

¶10

Smt. Rudramma W/o Eshappa K

¶11

All are R/at: Hanchinalu Village, Hampanal Post, Sindhanur Taluk, Raichur District- 584128

¶12

...DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : M.S Vinayaka Defendants : Exparte

OA 2708-2024

FINAL ORDER

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 Rs.28,56,938/- (Rupees twenty eight lakh fifty six thousand nine hundred thirty eight 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 defendants availed the following credit facilities from the applicant bank:-

¶20

I. AGTL Loan of a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- (Rupees three lakh fifty thousand Only) and

¶21

II. Farm Development loan limit of Rs.5,30,000/- (Rupees five lakh thirty thousand Only).

¶22

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendant executed necessary loan documents along with sanction memorandum, memorandum of agreement and letters of revival in favor of the applicant bank.

¶23

It is further contended that, the defendants 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

OA 2708-2024

accounts as NPA.

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, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 26.11.2025.

¶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-31 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶30

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.

¶31

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

OA 2708-2024

¶35

¶36

10. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶37

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 facilities 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 defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶38

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

¶39

Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence

¶40

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

¶41

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶42

are availed by defendants for agricultural purpose and also that

¶43

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).

¶44

OA 2708-2024

¶45

¶46

In the result, OA.No.2708/2024, stands allowed,

¶47

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate

¶48

sum of Rs.28,56,938/- (Rupees twenty eight lakh fifty six

¶49

thousand nine hundred thirty eight only) with further interest @6% p.a. (Simple),

¶50

from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendants

¶51

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 proceedings against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶52

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

¶53

jointly severally and personally and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against for the balance amount.

¶54

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶58

OA 2708-2024

¶59

¶60

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

¶61

in terms of this final order.

¶62

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶63

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

¶64

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

¶65

Sd/ (T. RAJESH)

¶66

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶67

ANNEXURES

¶68

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶69

AW-1: Pradeep Kumar EV, Branch Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶70

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶71

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

¶72

Sl.No	Date	Description of loan documents	Annexure
01	13/12/2006	Loan Application Formsubmitted by defendants	A-1
02	13/12/2006	^{Loan Sanction Memorandum}	A-2
03	13/12/2006	^{Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans} executed by defendantsin favourof applicant	A-3
04	13/12/2006	^{Letter Evidencing Deposit of Title Deeds executed by} defendants in favour of applicant	A-4
05	02/06/2008	^{Loan Application form submitted by defendants}	A-5
06	02/06/2008	^{Loan Sanction Memorandum}	A-6

¶73

OA 2708-2024

¶74

¶75

07	02/06/2008	^{Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans} executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-7
08	02/06/2008	Simple Mortgage Deed executed by defendants in favour of applicant registered as Document No.1392/2008-09	A-8
09	16/12/2008	Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-9
10	10/12/2011	Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-10
11	16/08/2014	Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-11
12	31/10/2015	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stdefendant in favour of applicant	A-12
13	31/10/2015	Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-13
14	07/09/2018	Letter of Revival executed by 2^nddefendant in favour of applicant	A-14
15	10/10/2018	Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour of applicant	A-15
		Letter of Revival executed by defendants in favour
16	11/08/2021	of applicant for AGTL and Farm Development loans	A-16
17	20/08/2010	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stand 2^nd defendants in favour of applicant	A-17
18	15/12/2012	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stdefendant in favour of applicant	A-18
19	15/12/2012	Letter of Revival executed by 2^nddefendant in favour of applicant	A-19
20	26/06/2014	Legal Notice issued to 1^stdefendant	A-20
21	31/10/2015	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stand 2^nddefendants in favour of applicant	A-21
22	31/10/2015	Letter of Revival executed by 1sst defendant in favour of applicant	A-22
23	10/10/2018	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stand 2^nddefendants in favour of applicant	A-23
24	02/07/2021	Letter of Revival executed by 1^stdefendant in favour of applicant	A-24
25	03/03/2022	Demand Notice issued to defendants	A-25
26	12/04/2024	Legal Notice issued to defendants	A-26
27		Postal Tracking report of 1^stdefendant	A-27
28		Postal Tracking report of 2^nddefendant	A-28
29		Postal Tracking report of 3^rddefendant	A-29

¶76

¶77

OA 2708-2024

¶78

30	Statement of Farm Development Loan Account	A-30
31	Statement of AGTL Loan Account and Memo of calculation	A-31

¶79

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶80

Sd/
(T. RAJESH)
PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Nagappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Nagappa

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