Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Dyavaiah Since Deceased Represented by their Legal Heirs Sri Yogesh

DRT24 Feb 2026OA/307/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by the bank seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The Tribunal upheld the liability of the deceased borrower's legal heirs for an agricultural loan default, granting relief to recover the principal and a reduced simple interest of 6.00% from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate allowing recovery of Rs. 27,06,435/- with further interest at 6.00% p.a. (simple) plus costs.

Canara Bank versus Sri Dyavaiah Since Deceased Represented by… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of February, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH

¶4

Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.307/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank Arkalgud Branch, Singa Pataldamma Complex, Near KSRTC Bus Stand, Arkalgud, Hassasn Dist. Karnataka – 573 102

¶8

Through its Manager Praveen Kumar ML …APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. Dyavaiah

¶11

(Since deceased represented by their legal heirs)

¶12

Sri. Yogesh S/o. Dyavaiah Aged about 24 years R/o. Vaddra Koppalu Village, Malalikere Dakale, Kasaba Hobli, Arkalgud Taluk, Hassan Dist. Karnataka – 573 220

¶13

Ms. Baby D/o. Dyavaiah Aged about 20 years R/o. Vaddra Koppalu Village, Malalikere Dakale, Kasaba Hobli,

¶14

OA. No. 307/2024

¶15

¶16

Arkalgud Taluk, Hassan Dist. Karnataka – 573 220

¶17

Ms. Prathima D/o. Dyavaiah Aged about 20 years R/o. Vaddra Koppalu Village, Malalikere Dakale, Kasaba Hobli, Arkalgud Taluk, Hassan Dist. Karnataka – 573 220

¶18

Smt. Parvathamma W/o. Dyavaiah Aged about 50 years R/o. Vaddra Koppalu Village, Malalikere Dakale, Kasaba Hobli, Arkalgud Taluk, Hassan Dist. Karnataka – 573 220 ...DEFENDANTS

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Vignesh Shetty Defendant no.1 : Deceased Defendant no.2 to 5 : Exparte

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for

¶22

Rs. 27,06,435/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Six Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Five Only) with further interest thereon from

¶23

OA. No. 307/2024

¶24

¶25

the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶26

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant nos. 2 to 5 are the legal heirs of the deceased borrower Sri. Dyavaiah, who expired during the pendency of OA have availed an agricultural machinery/vehicle loan of Rs. 4,60,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only) for agricultural purpose.

¶27

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the deceased borrower Sri. Dyavaiah executed necessary loan document. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of simple mortgage deed over the schedule property.

¶28

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, borrower failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

¶29

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.

¶30

After filling of the OA, summons sent to defendants by registered post. The summons to defendant no.1 returned unserved with an endorsement “dead” and the applicant bank has

¶31

OA. No. 307/2024

¶32

¶33

filed a memo stating that defendant no.1 expired, the defendant nos. 2 to 5 surviving legal heirs of deceased defendant no.1. Despite, services completed, the defendant nos. 2 to 5 placed ex parte on 26.09.2025.

¶34

The applicant let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A8 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶35

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.

¶36

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶37

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶38

claim as against the defendants?

¶39

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶40

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶41

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶42

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

¶43

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the

¶44

OA. No. 307/2024

¶45

¶46

applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶47

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶48

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are

¶49

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

¶50

In the result, OA.No.307/2024 stands allowed,

¶51

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum

¶52

of Rs. 27,06,435/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Six Thousand

¶53

Four Hundred and Thirty Five Only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the

¶54

defendant nos. 2 to 5, to the extent of their inheritance of any

¶55

estate form the deceased borrower Sri. Dyavaiah, after giving

¶56

credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the

¶57

OA. No. 307/2024

¶58

¶59

pendency of the OA allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property

¶60

to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶61

ii) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient to clean the liability defendant nos. 2 to 5 are liable to the extent of estate they inherited from deceased Sri. Dyavaiah for the balance amount.

¶62

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶63

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

¶64

receipt of the order.

¶65

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

¶66

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶67

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

¶68

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶69

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

¶70

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶71

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of February, 2026].

¶72

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Sd/-

OA. No. 307/2024

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶77

AW-1 R Venkatalakshmi, W/o. S Palanivel, Senior Manager, of the applicant bank.

¶78

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶79

Annexure	Particulars
A1	Loan Application Dated 10.06.2006
A2	Sanction letter dated 10.06.2006
A3	Simple Mortgage Deed Dated 31.01.2006
A4	Memorandum of agreement dated 16.06.2006
A5	Legal heirpromissorynote 29.12.2018
A6	Letter of revival dated 28.04.2009, 17.02.2012, 11.02.2015, 01.01.2018,16.12.2019 and 02.02.2022
A7	Legal notice dated 16.01.2023
A8	True extract of accounts statement 0782856006293

¶80

Witness Examined for the Defendants: List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri Dyavaiah Since Deceased Represented by their Legal Heirs Sri Yogesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Dyavaiah Since Deceased Represented by their Legal Heirs Sri Yogesh

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 Mr Mohammad Akram S/O Mohammad Quasam

Samiran Roy versus Bank of Baroda

State Bank of India versus Hetali Roshan Fernandes

Ms Tulsi Mineral Water versus State Bank of India

Ms Rehana Enterprise and Anr. versus Bank of Baroda

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Gunderao