Allowed

Canara Bank v. Rekha M

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/315/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank against the defendant. The Bank sought a recovery certificate for a defaulted loan. The defendant appeared ex parte. The Tribunal confirmed the liability and reduced the interest rate to 12% p.a. simple for business purposes.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 36,46,262/- with interest at 12.00% p.a. (simple) till realization to be recovered from the defendant personally or against schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Rekha M — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this 30^th Day of January, 2026

¶4

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.315/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Branch office at: South end road branch, No.93, south end road, South end circle, Bengaluru – 560 004

¶7

Represented by its Manger Smt. Thota Manjusha …APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Smt. Rekha M D/o. Sri. Munirama Aged about 34 years Proprietrix. M/s. R & R paper cup and bag manufacturers

¶10

No. 28/8, 9, 10, Opposite Reva University, Muneshwara Layout, Kattigenahalli, Yelahanka, Bengaluru – 560 064 ...DEFENDANT

¶11

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶12

Applicant : Mohanadasa N Defendant : Ex parte

¶13

2 OA-315/2022

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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 against the defendant for Rs. 36,46,262/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Forty Six Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Two Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant is availed the following credit facilities:

¶17

OCC loan of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Only) on 28.06.2019.

¶18

Working capital term loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only).

¶19

Term loan of Rs. 14,86,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Eighty Six Thousand Only) on 30.09.2019.

¶20

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above availed loans, the defendant executed the necessary loan document along with deed of hypothecation.

¶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 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

3 OA-315/2022

¶24

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 01.04.2025.

¶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-15 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 claim as against the defendant?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

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 facilities as stated in the OA,

¶32

creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the

¶33

accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶34

due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the

¶35

4 OA-315/2022

¶36

applicant is well within the limitation.

¶37

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶38

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for Business purpose and 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 12.00%(simple).

¶39

In the result, OA.No.315/2022 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 36,46,262/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs Forty Six Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Two Only) with further interest @12.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant 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 proceeding against the schedule properties. Properties schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

¶40

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants personally and her assets are liable for balance amounts due under

¶41

5 OA-315/2022

¶42

the loan accounts.

¶43

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶47

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

¶48

terms of this final order.

¶49

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶50

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

¶51

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶52

[Dictated to the Stenographer (HS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in

¶53

the Open Court, this the 30^th Day of January, 2026].

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Palanivel Rajan S, S/o. Sri. Subramanian, Chief Manager, of Applicant Bank.

¶59

6 OA-315/2022

¶60

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶61

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	28.06.2019	Letter of proprietorship
A2	28.06.2019	Request for overdraft facilities
A3	28.06.2019	On demand promissory note
A4	28.06.2019	Cash credit agreement
A5	28.06.2019	Deed of hypothecation reg. machinery
A6	28.06.2019	Letter of undertaking
A7	29.07.2020	Agreement-cum-deed hypothecation
A8	29.07.2020	Letter of undertaking
A9	26.03.2021	Letter of restructuring
A10	26.03.2021	Debts restructuring agreement
A11	17.11.2021	Certified account extract for OCC limit
A12	17.11.2021	Certified account extract for term loan
A13	17.11.2021	Certified account extract for WCTL
A14	17.11.2021	Certified account extract for FITL
A15	17.11.2021	Certified account extract for Covid FITL

¶62

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

¶63

-Nil -

¶64

-Nil -

¶65

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Rekha M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Rekha M

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

S Rajeswari versus Union Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Kishan Mitrapal Chawla Dairy

Bank of India versus Ms Narmada Pipes

Ms Khajuria Constructions and Another versus State Bank of India

Raj Kumar Baniya versus State Bank of India

Smt Firoja Begum versus Indian Bank