Allowed

Canara Bank v. C H v Suresh Chowdary

DRT20 Aug 2026OA/531/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Defendant defaulted on agricultural loans secured by a mortgage. In ex parte proceedings, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application to draw a Recovery Certificate for Rs.30.70 lakhs, permitting recovery at a reduced simple interest rate of 6% p.a. on the outstanding principal.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate for Rs.30,70,048 plus interest @ 6% p.a. simple for recovery proceedings; execution against mortgaged and other assets; costs to be tendered.

Canara Bank versus C H v Suresh Chowdary — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 20^th Day of August 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.531/2024

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Maski Branch, Basavangouda Building, New Bazar, Maski, Lingasugur Taluk, Raichur District-584124. …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. C.H.V.Suresh Chowdary S/o.Sri.C.H. Ramakrishna, R/o.Medikinal, Medikinal Village, Lingasugur Taluk, Raichur District-584124. ...DEFENDANT

¶9

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶10

Applicant : Smt.Veena R.Rai Defendant : Exparte

¶11

: Exparte

¶12

: FINAL ORDER:

¶13

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 defendant for Rs.30,70,048.00 (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Seventy Thousand Forty-Eight Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendant.

¶14

2 OA No.531/2024

¶15

The Defendant availed a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Eighty Thousand Only) for purpose of Agriculture Loan. Kisan Credit Card Scheme.

¶16

The Defendant availed a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) for purpose of Agriculture Loan. Kisan OD Loan.

¶17

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facility, the defendant executed necessary loan documents, being owner of the schedule property. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage, hypothecation over the Schedule property

¶18

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, 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 account as NPA.

¶19

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.

¶20

Despite, service of summons on the defendant, they failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 15.07.2025.

¶21

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 A11 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶22

3 OA No.531/2024

¶23

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.

¶24

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶25

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendant?

¶26

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶27

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶28

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant 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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶29

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.

¶30

4 OA No.531/2024

¶31

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for Agriculture purpose and also, that 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% p.a.(simple).

¶32

In the result, OA.No.531/2024 stands allowed.

¶33

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.30,70,048.00 (Rupees Thirty Lakhs Seventy Thousand Forty-Eight Only) along with current and future interest 6% from the date of filing the application till the date of realization, from the Defendant, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA if any, and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule properties. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶34

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

¶35

amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant and his other assets are liable for all such amounts due in loan accounts.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

5 OA No.531/2024

¶39

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

¶40

this Final Order.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

Rules, 1993.

¶44

[Dictated to the Stenographer (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 20^th Day of August 2026].

¶45

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶46

ANNEXURES

¶47

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶48

AW-1: Sri.Babu Lal, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶49

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶50

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Date	Exhibit Number
1.	Loan application submitted by Defendant	05.11.2013	A1
2.	Sanction Letter of the Applicant	05.11.2013	A2
3.	Agreement of hypothecation for Kisan credit card loans executed byDefendant	05.11.2013	A3
4.	Simple mortgage deed executed by Defendant	31.10.2013	A4
5.	Loan application submitted by the Defendant	31.07.2014	A5
6.	Specimen Signature Card of the Defendant	31.07.2014	A6
7.	Sanction memorandum of the applicant	31.07.2014	A7
8.	Agreement and Deed for kisan OD executed by Defendant	31.07.2014	A8

¶51

6 OA No.531/2024

¶52

9.	Simple mortgage deed executed by Defendant	28.04.2014	A9
10.	Statement of account in respect of KCCS Loan alongwith certificate	11.01.2024	A10
11.	Statement of account in respect of Kisan OD alongwith certificate	11.01.2024	A11

¶53

Sd/(T. RAJESH)

¶54

PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. C H v Suresh Chowdary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. C H v Suresh Chowdary

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

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Sri.Heeru Somalu Lamani

Canara Bank versus Sri.Vijayakumar

Canara Bank versus Sri.Veerendra. D.M

Ms Anjani Kumar Srivastava and Others versus Mansarovar Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Mr Amit Kumar Nag and Anr. versus Axis Bank Limited

Sri Tuhin Kumar Das and Another versus Bank of India