Allowed

Canara Bank v. Venkaraddi ramaraddi hucharaddi

DRT27 Mar 2026OA/381/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate of over Rs. 48 Lakhs against the defendants, holding the evidence uncontroverted since they were absent, and reduced the interest rate to 8% p.a. simple.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.48,89,321/- plus interest at 8% p.a. simple from filing, to be recovered from respondents jointly, severally, against schedule property.

Canara Bank versus Venkaraddi ramaraddi hucharaddi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 27^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.381/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Having its branch at Saundatti, Belgaum District-591126 Rep. by its Branch Manager, Sajeev Mathew

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Venkaraddi Ramaraddi Hucharaddi S/o. Ramaraddi Aged about 53 years R/at. Haralakatti, Saundatti Taluk, Belagavi District -591126

¶10

Sri. Ningaraddi Shivaraddi Hucharaddi S/o. Shivaraddi, Aged about 55 eyars, R/at.No. Haralakatti, Saundatti Taluk, Belagavi District-591126

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Sri. M.R. Shashidhar Defendants : Exparte

¶14

:FINAL ORDER:

¶15

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶16

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for

¶17

OA. No.381/2023

¶18

¶19

seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.48,89,321/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lakh Eighty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty One only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed housing loan of Rs.5,00,000/- for the purpose of construction of the house on 19.08.2009; Kisan OD limit of Rs.12.00 lakhs on 24.06.2016; KCCS loan of Rs.8.00 lakhs on 24.06.2016.

¶21

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of hypothecation and mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶22

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶23

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.

¶24

OA. No.381/2023

¶25

¶26

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 08.08.2024.

¶27

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A16 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶28

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.

¶29

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶30

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶31

claim as against the defendants?

¶32

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶35

remains 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 security interest as claimed by the

¶36

OA. No.381/2023

¶37

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities

¶41

was availed for housing and agricultural purposes and also that OA

¶42

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 8.00% p.a.(simple).

¶43

In the result, OA.No.381/2023 stands allowed,

¶44

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶45

of Rs.48,89,321/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lakh Eighty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty One only) with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization

¶46

from the defendants, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed

¶47

the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants

¶48

OA. No.381/2023

¶49

¶50

jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against

¶51

the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the

¶52

schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶53

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover

¶54

the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶55

jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶56

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶57

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

¶58

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

¶59

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶60

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

¶61

with this Final Order.

¶62

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

¶64

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶65

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 27^th Day of March 2026].

¶66

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.381/2023

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶71

AW-1: Sri. Suresh Kumar Mandi, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

¶72

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶73

Sl. No.	Description of Documents		Exhibit Number
1	Registered simple mortgage deed 22.06.2016 executed by defendant No.	dated 1	A1
2	Loan application dated 24.06.2016		A2
3	Sanction memorandum dated 24.06.20	16	A3
4	Agreement and deed for Kissan OD 24.06.2016	dated	A4
5	Letter of revival dated 15.06 04.02.2021	.2019,	A5 & A6
6	Simple mortgage deed dated 22.06.20	16	A7
7	Loan application for credit card 24.06.2016	dated	A8
8	Sanction memorandum letter 24.06.2016	dated	A9
9	Agreement and deed of hypothecati kissan credit card dated 24.06.2016	on for	A10
10	Letter or revivals dated 15.06.2019, 4.	2.2021	A11 & A12
11	The demand notice under S.13(2) 08.03.2022	dated	A13
12	Account statement		A14 to A16

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Venkaraddi ramaraddi hucharaddi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Venkaraddi ramaraddi hucharaddi

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

State Bank of India versus Rajendrakumar Jain

Inno Infra Pvt. Ltd. and 9 Others versus Indian Overseas Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Rajdeepsinh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Sher Singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Smt. Jaswinder Kaur

Hdfc Bank versus Ms Bandhav Filling Centre