Allowed

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

DRT24 Jul 2026OA/3399/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's recovery petition filed under Section 19 RDB Act, 1993. Being an ex parte hearing, the bank's evidence was uncontroverted. The claimed agricultural loan debt and mortgage were established. The Tribunal allowed the petition but reduced the applicable interest rate from the agreed rate to 6% p.a. (simple).

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 23,50,478.36 (principal) with interest at 6% p.a. (simple) from filing until realization, recoverable from defendants and schedule property.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of July, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA.No.3399/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Sathenahalli Branch, Sathenahalli Post, Channarayapatna Taluk, Dist. Hassan-573 111, Through its Branch manager Smt. Manjula G.C. …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Mr. Manjegowda S/o Late Nanje Gowda Since Deceased through his Legal heirs as well as Borrower/ Mortgagors defendant No.2 to 4 herein

¶9

Smt. Rangamma W/o Manjegowda Age : 65 years , Agasarahalli, Bagur Hobli, Taluk Channarayapatna, Hassan District-573 111.

¶10

Smt. Vasantha W/o Ramaswamy Gowda Age: 48 years Agasarahalli, Bagur Hobli, Taluk Channarayapatna, Hassan District-573 111.

¶11

Mr. Ramaswamy Gowda S/o Krishna Gowda

¶12

2 3399/2025

¶13

Age: 55 years Agasarahalli, Bagur Hobli, Taluk Channarayapatna, Hassan District-573 111. ...DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Mr.Naushad A. K. Defendants : Exparte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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 for Rs. 23,50,478.36/- (Rupees Twenty Three lakh Fifty Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Eight and Paise Thirty Six only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶18

It is the case of the applicant that defendants availed the Agricultural Loan of a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakh Only) on 23.05.2016. The defendants are the principal borrowers/ mortgagors of facilities, Defendant No.2 to 4 is the legal heirs of the deceased borrower defendant No.1 i.e. Manjegowda.

¶19

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans, Simple Mortgage Deed.

¶20

3 3399/2025

¶21

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 accounts as NPA.

¶22

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 01.07.2026.

¶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-09 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 the proof affidavit.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim

¶28

as against the defendants?

¶29

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶30

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶31

4 3399/2025

¶32

1. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains

¶33

unrebutted as defendants 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.

¶34

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.

¶35

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

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are

¶37

availed for education purpose and also that the 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 6.00% (simple).

¶38

In the result, OA.No.3399/2025 stands allowed,

¶39

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.

¶40

23,50,478.36/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakh Fifty Thousand Four hundred Seventy Eight and Paise Thirty Six only) with further interest @ 6.00%

¶41

p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the

¶42

5 3399/2025

¶43

defendants, including defendant No.2 to 4 to the extent of their inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrower defendant No.1 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.

¶44

(ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets and the assets of the defendant No.2 to 4 to extent of her inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrower defendant No.1 i.e. Manjegowda are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶45

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms

¶49

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

¶50

6 3399/2025

¶51

Rules, 1993.

¶52

[Dictated to the Stenographer (DV), transcribed by him, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th day of July, 2026].

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

(T. RAJESH)

¶55

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Manjula. G.C., Manager of Applicant Bank.

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Exhibit Nos.	Date	Particulars of Documents
A-1	23.05.2016	Sanction Letter
A-2	09.06.2016	Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans
A-3	11.05.2016	Simple Mortgage Deed
A-4	01.09.2018	Letter of Revival
A-5	15.06.2020	Letter of Revival
A-6	07.07.2021	Letter of Revival
A-7	31.03.2023	Letter of Revival
A-8	21.11.2025	Notice
A-9		True Extract of Statement of Accounts pertaining to the Defendants aforesaid loan Accounts 4352883000008
A-10	--	Certificate under section 2a of Banker’s Book evidence act, 1891.

¶61

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

¶62

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

7 3399/2025

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Manjegowda

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kaushelendra Pratap others versus Grihum Housing Finance Limited

Ms Lakshya Textiles Agency versus Uco Bank

Ms Maxx Metal Pvt. Ltd. and Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Gireesh Chand Garg versus Punjab National Bank

Rohit Jaiswal versus Canara Bank

Smt Alka and Another versus Canara Bank