Allowed

Canara Bank v. Shivakumar E

DRT24 Feb 2026OA/839/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank NRI Branch for issuance of a Recovery Certificate against defendants who were exparte in a housing loan dispute. The court awarded recovery of the claimed amount with interest reduced to 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.1,25,08,952/- with interest at 8% p.a. from filing date; Recovery Certificate directed; Interim Injunction made absolute.

Canara Bank versus Shivakumar E — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 24^th Day of February, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.839/2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank NRI Branch, BSNL Complex S V Road, M G Road, Bangalore – 560001 Reep. By its Senior Manager Mr. Arun V S

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Sri. Shiva Kumar E S/o. Eshwaraiah K S Aged about 52 years R/at: No.34, 5^th Cross, Jai Maruthi Nagar, Nandini Layout, Bengaluru – 560096

¶10

Smt. Kavitha S W/o. Shiva Kumar E R/at. No.34, 5th Cross, Jai Maruthi Nagar, Nandini Layout, Bengaluru – 560096

¶11

M/s. Cyma Investments Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director, Gopal P Shinde Office at No.204, Rajanigandha Garden Apartments, 21^st Vittal Malaya Road, Bengaluru-560001

¶12

M/s. Parth Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director, Gopal P Shinde Office at No.204, Rajanigandha Garden Apartments, 21^st Vittal Malaya Road, Bengaluru-560001

¶13

OA. No.839/2023

¶14

¶15

B. Lingappa S/o. B Boraiah Major, R/at. No.10, Lingappa Block, Ramakrishnaiah Street, Seshadripuram, Bengaluru-560010

¶16

Prema W/o. B. Laingapppa Major, R/at. No.10, Lingappa Block, Ramakrishnaiah Street, Seshadripuram, Bengaluru-560010

¶17

Chaitra D/o. B. Lingappa Major, R/at. No.10, Lingappa Block, Ramakrishnaiah Street, Seshadripuram, Bengaluru-560010

¶18

Harsha S/o. B. Lingappa Major, R/at. No.10, Lingappa Block, Ramakrishnaiah Street, Seshadripuram, Bengaluru-560010 ...DEFENDANTS

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶20

Applicant : Sri. C. Vinay Swamy Defendants : Exparte :FINAL ORDER:

¶21

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 defendants for Rs.1,25,08,952/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Five Lakh Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Two only) with further interest

¶22

OA. No.839/2023

¶23

¶24

thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶25

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed the housing loan of Rs.1,32,00,000/- on 28.03.2019 for purchase of residential Flat.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 05.02.2025.

¶30

OA. No.839/2023

¶31

¶32

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed their Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A8 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶33

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.

¶34

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶35

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

¶36

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶37

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶38

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application 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 facility as stated in the OA, as to the execution of Tripartite Agreement agreeing creation of security interest as claimed by the 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

OA. No.839/2023

the limitation.

Hence in view of the above finding which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is to be allowed.

¶43

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for housing 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 to 8.00% p.a. (simple).

¶44

In the result, OA.No.839/2023 stands allowed,

¶45

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.1,25,08,952/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Five Lakh Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Two only) with further interest of 8.00% p.a.(simple), from the date of filing OA till the realization from the defendants, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants jointly, severally, personally and also by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶46

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants

¶47

OA. No.839/2023

¶48

¶49

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

¶50

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

v) The Interim Order of Injunction passed in IA.No.942/2023 in OA.No.839/2023 is made, absolute.

¶54

vi) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶55

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶56

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶57

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 24^th Day of February 2026].

¶58

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶61

AW-1: Sri. Madeshwaran M, Chief Manager of the applicant bank.

¶62

OA. No.839/2023

¶63

¶64

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶65

Description of the document	Date	Exhibit No.
Application cum appraisal form	25.03.2019	A1
Sanction letter	28.03.2019	A2
Tripartite agreement entered	29.03.2019	A3
Housing loan agreement	30.03.2019	A4
Application for restructure	29.03.2021	A5
Legal notice and postal receipts/ acknowledgments and returned covers	-	A6 & A7
Statement of account	-	A8

¶66

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Shivakumar E

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Shivakumar E

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr Mohammad Akram S/O Mohammad Quasam

Samiran Roy versus Bank of Baroda

State Bank of India versus Hetali Roshan Fernandes

Ms Tulsi Mineral Water versus State Bank of India

Ms Rehana Enterprise and Anr. versus Bank of Baroda

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank versus Gunderao