Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Krishna Murthy G

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/2879/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank for a Recovery Certificate against an ex parte defendant. The Tribunal reduced the interest rate to 6% simple per annum for an agricultural loan and ordered recovery from personal assets or schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate directed to be issued for Rs. 25,09,658.95 plus interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from the filing date, recoverable from personal assets or schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Sri Krishna Murthy G — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of August, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer OA.No.2879/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Branch office at: Ashoka Road Cross, Tumkur – 572 102

¶7

Represented by its Manager Sri. K Suresh Kumar …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Krishna Murthy G S/o. late Govindaiah K B Aged about 53 years Working as junior assistant, KSRTC depot, Tumkur – 572 129

¶10

And also, at: No. 778/6, Opposite Canara bank, MG road, Gubbi Taluk, Tumkur district – 572 216 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Smt. Shibaz Khausar Defendant : Ex parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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 defendant for

¶15

Rs 25,09,658.95/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty-Eight and Paisa Ninety-Five Only) with further

¶16

OA-2879/2025

¶17

¶18

interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶19

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed a farm development loan of Rs. 8,00,00/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Only) for the purpose of agricultural activity for the cultivation of arecanut, banana etc.

¶20

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

¶21

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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 accounts 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 ex parte on 09.04.2026.

¶24

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-10 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

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.

¶26

OA-2879/2025

¶27

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶29

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶30

claim as against the defendant?

¶31

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶32

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility is

¶38

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).

¶39

OA-2879/2025

¶40

¶41

In the result, OA.No.2879/2025 stands allowed,

¶42

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶43

25,09,658.95/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lakhs Nine Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty-Eight and Paisa Ninety-Five Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant 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.

¶44

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant personally and his assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶46

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

¶47

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

v) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

¶49

OA-2879/2025

¶50

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶54

[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].

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶57

ANNEXURES

¶58

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶59

AW-1 K Suresh Kumar, S/o K Sathaiah, Branch Manager, of Applicant

¶60

Bank.

¶61

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶62

Exhib its	Date	Particulars
A1	10.07.2015	Loan application executed by the defendant in favour applicant bank
A2	14.07.2015	Sanction Memorandum
A3	14.07.2015	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans executed by the defendants
A4	14.07.2015	Certificate of loan papers obtained
A5	10.08.2015	Particulars of hypothecation executed by the defendant
A6	10.07.2015	Registered simple mortgage deed executed by the defendant
A7	04.05.2018	Letter of revival executed by the defendant
A8	02.11.2020	Letter of revival executed by the defendant
A9	10.08.2023	Letter of revival executed by the defendant
A10	----------	Statement of account in farm development loan in a/c no. 0522883011458

¶63

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶64

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶65

-Nil -

¶66

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶67

Sd/-

Canara Bank v. Sri Krishna Murthy G

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Krishna Murthy G

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