Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/s Kalawati Enterprises

DRT23 Jun 2026OA/390/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank applied under Section 19 RDDBFI Act for recovery of loan dues approx Rs 22 Lacks from borrower. Tribunal found claim established via documentary evidence and ruled in favor of the bank.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.22,11,968.25 along with pendente-lite and future interest from 22/05/2025 and costs.

What the court decided

Canara Bank versus M/s Kalawati Enterprises — Money Laundering | DRT (2026)

¶1

OA 390 of20251JI

¶2

DRT, PATNA

¶3

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Aashiana Digha Road Patna-800025

¶4

Presiding Officer : Shri Kaushalendra Yadav

¶5

OA Case No. 390 of 2025

¶6

Canara Bank, branch office at Exhibition Road, Luv Kush Tower, Patna 800001

¶7

. . . . . . .Applicant

¶8

¶9

M/s Kalawati Enterprises, a proprietorship concern through its proprietor Suryadeo Kumar, S/o Brijnath Sah (Borrower fi.rm)

¶10

Suryadeo Kumar, S/o Brijnath Sah, resident of Tulsi Mandi, Gulzarbagh, Patna City, Patna- 800007, PAN No. BFVPK9994Q

¶11

. . Defendants

¶12

Present:

¶13

For the Applicant Shri Manish Kishore, Advocate For the Defendants None

¶14

Dated:23.06.2026

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The Applicant bank has made this application u/s 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (here-in-after referred to as Act) on 22.05.2025 against the defendants to recover its debts from defendants of Rs.22,11,968.25 as on 05.05.2025 along with pendente-lite and future interest at the contractual rate from 06.05.2025 with costs till realization.

¶17

The application has been filed with the contention that the applicant bank, is a body corporate, carries on the business and is competent to file the suit through various branches including the applicant.

¶18

Defendant no.1 is a proprietorship firm of which defendant no.2 is the proprietor. Defendants approached the applicant bank for sanction of cash credit limit of Rs.11.50 Lakh, vide loan application dated 24.08.2019 for running of distributorship business of FMCG products, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 07.09.2019 under CGTMSE Scheme on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various

OA 390 of2025jJ1

DRT, PATN A

loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA

¶24

Defendants further approached the applicant bank for renewal/sanction of said cash credit limit of Rs.11.50 Lakh to Rs.20 Lakh. vide loan application dated 19.10.2020, which was sanctioned by the applicant bank on 19.10.2020 on various terms and conditions, as stipulated in the sanction letter, which were duly accepted by the defendants. To secure the loan facilities defendants have executed various loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank, details of which are given in OA. Said facility was further renewed on 18.10.2021 .

¶25

The defendants requested the bank to restructure the loan account in order to clear the overdue amount in view of RBI Guidelines during Covid period and submitted loan application dated 05.11.202 1. Accordingly, the applicant bank sanctioned Rs.4 Lakh on 05.11.2021 under GECL Scheme. The loan facilities were renewed on 17.12.2022 and 16.12.2023 .

¶26

After availing the sanctioned credit facilities, the defendants became irregular in repayment of their dues as per agreed terms and failed to adhere to the financial norms of the bank and avoiding the repayment of its dues to the bank, in spite of several assurances given by it to the applicant bank resulting in the account turning as NPA on 04.03.2025 .

¶27

Since, the defendants failed and neglected in spite of several reminders to make payment of the dues recoverable to the bank, hence this application has been filed by the bank.

¶28

The total liability in the loan account is Rs.22,11,968.25 as on 05.05.2025 with pendente-lite and future interest contractual rate from 06.05.2025 till the realization.

¶29

This Tribunal issued summons/notices copies of application & paper book to the defendants by registered/speed post on 25.06.2025, requiring themb to show-cause within 30 days of the service U/s 19 (4) of the Act & Rule of the

OA 390 of2025jJl

DRT1 PATNA

DRT [Procedure] Rules, 1993. But the defendants have not appeared, hence, the Registry of this Tribunal has ordered to publish the notice in newspaper and subsequently, substituted service by publication of notice by way of advertisement in newspaper was also made against the defendants on 12.09.2025 in “Prabhat Khabar” and “Morning India” newspapers.

¶34

The defendant in person appeared in this case but he has not filed written statement hence vide order dated 05.02.2026 opportunity to file the written statement was closed.

¶35

To prove its case, the applicant Bank has referred various certified photocopies of documents before this Tribunal. The applicant bank has also given evidence on affidavit by way of affidavit by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Senior Manager of the applicant bank. The details of documents are as follows:

¶36

SI.No	Descriptionof Documents Photocopies	1Date of IExecution 1	IAmount 1(in 1Lakh:	Signature Executants	of	1Ex./ Ann No.
	o			Defendants
	Sanctiol memorandum			Bank accepted defendants	and by
	Pronote	07.09.2019	11 .50	Defendants
	Request letterfor OD facilit'	07.09.2019	11.50	Defendants
5	Specimensignature card	07.09.2019		e
6	Cash credit agreement	07.09.2019	11.50	e
	f6T	07.09.2019	11 .50	Defendants
	Letter ofrenewal	19. 10.2020	20.00	Defendants
	Sanction memorandum	19.10.2020	20.00	Bank accepted defendants	and by
	Pronote	19.10.2020	8.50	Defendants
	Supplemental agreement	19.10.2020	20.00	Defendants
12	)bT	19.10.2020	20.00	Defendants		12
	Linkletter	19.10.2020		Defendants'
	Letterofrenewal			Defendants
	Letter of 'roDrietorshi	18.10.2021		Defendants
16	Letter evidencing execution of documents	18.10.2021	20.00	Defendants		16
	Loanapplication	05.11.2021	4.00	Defendants
	Sanctio-nletter	05.11.2021	4.00	Bank	and

OA 390 of 20251 Jl

DRT, PATN A

				accepte defendants	dby
	r			Defendants
	e			Defendants
	e lroDrietorshi			Defendants
22	SanMe		a	- accepted defendants	by
	Annexure	17.12.2022		Defendants
	Letter ofrenewal	16.12.2023		Defendants
	Letter of lroDrietorshi	16.12.2023		Defendants
	SanctionMer	16.12.2023		Defendants
	Communication of repaymentschedule	16.12.2023		Defendants
28	Notine	12.03.2025 24.03.2025 16.04.2025		Bank		28
29	Statement of accounts			B

¶41

Heard arguments and perused the case record.

¶42

Ld. Counsel of applicant bank submitted that the defendants have taken the loan and utilized the same and also executed the various loan documents to secure the loan. Further, submitted that the claim of the bank has been proved by documentary evidence. All the transactions were entered in the ledger of the loan accounts in the name of the defendant duly maintained by the applicant bank in its usual course of business. The interest /compound interest has been charged at such rates, and capitalized at such periodical rests as are permitted by and do not run counter to the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶43

It is further submitted by Id. Counsel of applicant bank that there is no stay granted by any Higher Court, in respect of the proceedings of the present OA and requested to issue recovery certificate, as claimed for, in OA.

¶44

It has been established that defendants are living and carrying on their business in the state of Bihar. Cause of action also arose in the State of Bihar. The said claim on the date of filing of application exceeded Rs.20 laos. The applicant bank is functioning within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Therefore, this Tribunal has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present application. N / VB,U

OA 390 of 2025jJI

DRT, PATN A

On the issue of Limitation, to prove it, the applicant bank has submitted that the applicant bank has declared the account as NPA on 04.03.2025, whereas the present application has been filed on 22.05.2025. Even, it is counted for the purpose of Limitation, then it is established that the applicant bank has filed the case within the limitation period. As such, it is established that the present application has been filed well within the period of limitation.

¶49

Shri Sanjay Kumar, Senior Manager of the applicant bank has filed the affidavit in support of contents of application and the documents as evidence and proved on oath the pleadings and documents of the applicant bank as stated above.

¶50

Section 19(3) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 provides that the application u/s S.19 (1) shall be accompanied with true copies of all the documents relied on in support of the claim.

¶51

The rule 12 (10) of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, provides that if the defendant denies his liability to pay the claim made by the applicant, the tribunal may act upon the affidavit of the applicant who is acquainted with the facts of the case or who has on verification of the record sworn the affidavit in respect of the contents of the application and the documents as evidence.

¶52

The rule 12 (11) of the aforesaid Rules, provides that the provisions contained in section 4 of the Banker’s Books evidence that Act, 1891 (18 of 1891) shall apply to a certified copy of an entry in a Banker’s Books furnished along with application filed under sub section 1 of section 19 by the applicant.

¶53

Section 4 of Banker’s Books evidence Act, 1891 runs as underS.4. Mode of proof of entries in bankers’ books.–Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certifIed copy of any entry in a banker’s book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible, but not further or otherwise.

¶54

As such the certified true copies of the documents are admissible in evidence. The statement of account maintained in the ordinary course of business is not only admissible but shall be taken as the correct statement of account, more so since the entries in the statement of account have not been challenged.

t;AL

OA 390 of2025jJI

DRT, PATNA

On perusal of the application, documents, affidavit and on consideration of the arguments, it is proved that the defendants have applied for loan and the bank had sanctioned the loan and to secure the loan and for repayment of loan amount with interests etc., the defendants have executed various loan documents, as stated in the application and proved by aforesaid evidence. Defendants have neither denied the utilization of funds advanced by applicant bank nor have pointed out any specific error and discrepancy in' the Statement of Account.

¶60

The evidence discussed above goes to establish that the amount of loan as mentioned in the O. A., was availed by the borrower under the agreed terms and conditions for repayment with interest. The balance amount till 05.05.2025 has been proved to be Rs.22,11,968.25 only by way of statement of accounts. There is nothing to prove the amount more than that disclosed in the aforementioned statement. As such this amount is recoverable till full and final realization of the claim.

¶61

In my view, facts of the case stand proved by evidence of the applicant bank. Accordingly, the applicant bank is entitled to recover from defendants jointly and severally of Rs.22,11,968.25 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. simple from 22.05.2025 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization. So the final order may be passed accordingly, to meet the ends of JustIce.

¶62

ORDER

¶63

In the result, the application of the applicant bank is allowed and debt is determined with costs against the defendants. The defendants are hereby jointly and severally, ordered to pay the applicant .bank its debt amounting to Rs.22, 11,968.25 along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 10% p.a. simple from 22.05.2025 (The date of filing of this OA) till realization of the entire sum due and recoverable with costs.

¶64

It is made clear that any amount deposited by the defendants, be deducted in the claim amount, if not deducted.

¶65

Defendants are debarred from transferring, alienating encumbering or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the mortgaged or hypothecated or any

DRT, PATNA

OA 390 of 20251 Jl

other properties and assets without paying the aforesaid adjudicated dues to the applicant bank to secure the ends of justice. The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the loan in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceedings in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993. The applicant may submit the certified copy of this Judgment and the Recovery Certificate before the Registrar/Sub- Registrar to endorse the charge over the secured assets.

¶71

Let a certificate of recovery be drawn up forthwith and put up for signatures in terms of provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act to be issued, on the basis of the order of the Tribunal to the Recovery Officer. The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per the certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under the Act from the defendants, by sale of mortgaged/ hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/immovable assets of the defendants. However, no proclamation of sale will be issued, if the Defendant/CertifIcate Debtor ensures payment of the certifIcate amount in 6 months from the date of demand notice to the CertifIcate debtors. The Recovery OffIcer will issue demand notice to the CertifIcate debtors only after the proof of compliance under rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules 1993, is submitted by the applicant. If The Applicant /Certificate holder fails to' comply with directions of the Recovery Of$cer, the execution may be dismissed for nonprosecution. The copy of this judgment be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.

¶72

Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Patna on 04.08.2026. The order be communicated accordingly.

¶73

Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on 23rd day of June, 2026.

¶74

Dictated &corrected by me.

¶75

P <r& Ja*'’P

¶76

[KaushalendraYadav] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna

¶77

FORM NO. 9 [See Regulation 24( 1 )]

¶78

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶79

2nd Floorl (A. B & F Wing) Karpwi Thakw Sadan! Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025'

ON 19( SA

R(,' No. 170/2026

Case No: OA/390/2025

In the Matter of:

(CH- 1) CAN ARA BANK BRANCH OFFICE AT EXHIBITION ROAD

Applicant(s)

LUV KUSH TOWER

PATNA ,BIHAR -800001

To (CD- 1) M/S KALAWATI ENTERPRISES a Proprietorship Concern Through its Proprietor Suryadeo Kumar, S/o- Brijnath Sah, Patna ,BIHAR -800007

¶90

Defendant(s)

¶91

(CD- 2) SURYADEO KUMAR

¶92

S/0- BRIJNATH SAH RESIDENT OF TULSI MANDI GULZARBAGH, PATNA CITY, PATNA 800007.

¶93

RecQvery Certificate fQr Rs 2211968.25 [ Rupee; Twenty TwQ Lakhs Eleven ThQpsand$ Nine Hundred Sixty Eight And Paige Twenty Five Only_I

¶94

In terms of final order dated 23/06/2026 passed by this Tribunal in the above mentioned case, it is ordered that the Applicant Certificate Holder Bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 2211968.25 along with cost, expenses and interest from the 22/05/2025 i.e. date of filing / with effective date of the OA/390/2025 and future interest from order date till the date of realisation in full, jointly or severally from the Certificate Debtors, hereinafter referred to as:-

¶95

Sr.no	CDName	;Loan Int !Type Type/Mode	Int. Rate	Effective Date	Order Date	iAmoua®s.)	Uabnity Type	Interest 8:£enr Date)	: Am=S(Rs.)	iRemark
1	:M/S KALAWATI ,ENTERPRISES	Simple Interest (Yearly)	10	,22/05/2025 :	23/06/2026	}221 1968.25	Jointly	:Interest	221 1968.25
_ z	’SURYADEO :KUMAR	Simple Interest '(Yearly)	10 ’	22/05/2025 .	23/06/2026	12211968.25			2211968.25

¶96

In case of failure to pay the aforementioned adjudicated amount within 30 days, same shall be recovered from the sale of the mortgaged/hypothecated assets as well as other personal movable/ Immovable assets of the certificate debtors.

¶97

The mortgaged or hypothecated assets to secure the ban in question are hereby attached and shall be subject to the final order under the recovery proceeding in pursuance of the Recovery certificate issued under Section 19(22) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 . Parties are directed to appear before ASHISH KUMAR , Recovery Officer, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA on 04/08/2026.

¶98

The Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per this Certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 to 28 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act) 1993 (as amended from time to time) from the above named Certificate Debtors.

¶99

This Certificate has been issued under my signature and seal of the Tribunal on this 24/06/2026

¶100

a\C

¶101

PREskMNG OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶102

D e::MX=1?P a t n a

¶103

FORM NO. 10

¶104

[See Regulation 24(2)]

¶105

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶106

2nd Floor, (A. B & F Wing) Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Kendriya Karamchari Parisar (GPOA), Ashiana Digha Road, Patna-800025.

¶107

SCHEDULE TO RECOVERY CERTIFICATE MEMO OF COSTS

RC No. 170/2026

Case No: OA/390/2025

Applicant(s): CANARA BANK Versus

¶112

Defendant(s): M/S KALAWATI ENTERPRISES

¶113

tem ofCosts	iAmountinRs
'eeon the application	i250fo
Process Fees(Inc. Publication)	;0
dvocateFees	10
iCommissioner/Receiver/Valuation/SecurityFee	lo
lscellaneous Charges	fO
Total Costs:Rs,	$25000

Place: PATNA

Date: 24/06/2026

PRESIDIN&OfFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PATNA

¶118

Note: Strike out whichever is not applicable

Canara Bank v. M/s Kalawati Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Canara Bank v. M/s Kalawati Enterprises

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

Axis Bank versus Ashis Kumar

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Nirmala

State Bank of India versus Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta & Anr.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Shyam Traders

Bank of India versus Car Laundary

Nataraj S versus Bank of Maharashtra