Allowed

Canara Bank v. Renavva Basavanagouda

DRT28 Jan 2026OA/667/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for a recovery certificate against a farmer who defaulted on an agricultural loan. The court reduced the interest rate to 6% simple interest given the agricultural nature of the advance.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 23,17,552/- with simple interest at 6% p.a. recoverable from the defendant personally and schedule properties.

Canara Bank versus Renavva Basavanagouda — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 28^th Day of January, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer OA.No.667/2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

Canara Bank Gajendragad Branch, Bhoom Reddy complex, RON road, Gajendragad, Gadag District – 582 114

¶6

Represented by its Senior Manager & PA holder Sri. Rahul Kapoor …APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Smt. Renavva Basavanagouda W/o. Basavanagouda Aged about 62 years

¶9

Residing at: Muganur Village and Taluk, Kustagi District, Koppal – 582 114 ...DEFENDANT

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : HSR & Associates Defendant : Ex parte

OA-667/2023

FINAL ORDER

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 seeking for issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendant for Rs. 23,17,552/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty 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 an farm development loan of Rs. 3,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only) for cultivation of pomegranate crop.

¶17

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

¶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 accounts 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, she failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set ex parte on 19.09.2025.

¶21

OA-667/2023

¶22

¶23

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-12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶24

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.

¶25

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶26

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA

¶27

claim as against the defendant?

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

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 facility as stated in the OA, creation of the security interest and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount

¶31

due are also proved by the above document. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶32

OA-667/2023

¶33

¶34

Hence in view of the findings arrived herein above, the Tribunal

¶35

find both these issues are in favour of applicant and hence, this

¶36

Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility are availed for Agricultural purpose and also that the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal is the view that the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% (simple).

¶38

In the result, OA.No.667/2023 stands allowed,

¶39

The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs. 23,17,552/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Two Only) with further interest @6.00 % p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, from the defendant personally, after giving credit to all the amounts 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 defendant personally and her assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

¶41

OA-667/2023

¶42

¶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

¶45

receipt of the order.

¶46

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

¶47

and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶48

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

¶49

terms of this final order.

¶50

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶51

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

¶52

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶53

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

¶54

the Open Court, this the 28^th Day of January, 2026].

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

(T. RAJESH)

¶57

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶58

ANNEXURES

¶59

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶60

AW-1 Ch. Divya Jyothi, W/o. P Purshotham Naidu, Manager & PA holder, of Applicant Bank

¶61

OA-667/2023

¶62

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhibit	Date	Particulars of Documents
Nos.
A1	19.08.2006	Loan application submitted by the defendant in respect of farm development loan
A2	19.08.2006	Sanction memorandum
A3	19.08.2006	Memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A4	21.07.2006	Simple mortgage deed executed by defendant in favour of the applicant bank
A5 to A10	27.11.2008 25.11.2011 20.11.2014 06.04.2017 30.07.2019 And 30.04.2022	6 nos. of letters of revival executed by the defendant in favour of applicant bank in respect of the farm development loan
A11 to A12	25.05.2022	Legal notice issued by the applicant bank to the defendant along with returned RPAD envelop
A13	--------	Certified account extract of the defendant maintained by the applicant bank

¶65

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

-Nil -

-Nil -

Sd/-

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Renavva Basavanagouda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Renavva Basavanagouda

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S First Engineer

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ram Sidhari

Icici Bank Limited versus Shaikh Ayub

Jitendra Singh versus Punjab National Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Sucha Singh

Canara Bank versus Manga Singh Aulakh