Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Canara Bank vs Mr. S. Ravi on 27 August 2026
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI
Dated this 27th day of August, 2026
PRESENT: SHRI SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY
PRESIDING OFFICER
TA No.173 of 2023
(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.583/2019 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.173 of 2023)
Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank)
Chidambaram Branch
Represented by its Branch Manager
No.63, South Car Street
Opp. Khadi Gramodyag Bhavan
Chidambaram – 608 001
…Applicant
Versus
1.
S. Ravi
S/o Mr. Sivaprakasam
2/136A, Nallucherry Village and Post
Tranquebar Taluk
Nagapattinam District – 609 109
2.
Mr. M. Vairakannu
S/o Mr. Maharaja
Vempadi Village, Vettangudi Post
Sirkali Taluk
Nagapattinam District – 609 115
…Defendants
Counsels on Record / Appeared
Counsel for Applicant Bank : M/s K.V. Subramanian Associatez Defendants ex-parte on 08.12.2021
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
FINAL ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants’
seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate for recovery of a sum of Rs.22,76,588.15p together with interest at the rate of 11.35% p.a. with half yearly rests plus 2% penal interest from the date of the application till the date of realisation along with costs of the application.
2. The subject matter of the case is the Farm Loan / Term Loan availed by the defendants from the Applicant Bank.
3. It is the case of the applicant that the 1st defendant is the borrower and the 2nd defendant is the guarantor. It is also the case of the applicant that the defendants approached the application by application dated 06.01.2011 for grant of Farm Loan for the purpose of fish farming and considering the said request the applicant sanctioned a loan of Rs.6.90 lakhs to the 1st defendant. The 1st defendant executed necessary loan and security documents on 13.01.2011 and the 2nd defendant executed guarantee agreement on 13.01.2011 thereby guaranteeing due repayment of the credit facility availed by the 1st defendant. It is stated that the 1st defendant also executed acknowledgement of debt on 15.09.2013 and 29.08.2016.
4. It is also the case of the applicant that the defendants defaulted in repayment and failed to regularize the loan account despite repeated demands and hence the loan account was classified as NPA on 31.08.2012 and the applicant bank issued legal notice dated 10.09.2018
requiring the applicant to clear the outstanding dues, but in vain. Hence the present OA is filed for recovery of its dues.
5. Summons was taken out to the defendants are served with notice and Mr. Aditya, Advocate undertook to file vakalat on behalf of 1st defendant. However, no vakalat is filed on behalf of the defendants. The defendants were granted time by this Tribunal vide proceedings dated 02.01.2020 to file their reply statement by 17.02.2020, failing which the opportunity shall stand closed. As the defendants were continuously absent and as there was no representation for the defendants on 08.12.2021, the defendants were set ex-parte on that day. Applicant Bank filed Proof Affidavit along with 10 documents, which were marked as Ex. A-1 to A-10 on 23.04.2024. The Ld. Counsel for Applicant Bank made his submissions on 30.06.2026 and thereafter the matter stood till this date for passing final orders.
6. The following issues arise for consideration in the matter: - (a) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the liability of the defendants?
(b) What order as to cost of the proceedings need be passed?
These issues are considered together.
7. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, perused the OA averments and the record placed before the Tribunal.
8. The evidence of the applicant is led by AW1 who produced the documents Exhibit A-1 to A-10 along with the proof affidavit. The documents produced in evidence are all found admissible. The proof affidavit of the applicant bank remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, on careful consideration of proof affidavit along with exhibits filed on behalf of the applicant bank, besides the material placed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant bank has successfully proved the OA claim against the defendants. Further, the statement of accounts in respect of the loan account produced and certified under the Banker’s Book Evidence Act, clearly indicates that the amount claimed by the applicant is due from the defendants. It is clear from the statement of accounts that penal interest is not capitalized.
9. In view of the foregoing, it is clearly evident that the application filed by the applicant bank is well within the period of limitation and this Tribunal possesses the territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain this OA.
10. In view of the fact that the loan facility availed by the defendant is a farm loan and the applicant has claimed interest at contractual rate till the date of filing of the OA, this Tribunal is of the view that the pendente lite interest can be awarded at reduced rates and the prayer for award of penal interest is rejected.
11. In view of the afore mentioned discussions, the only conclusion this Tribunal can draw is that the applicant had clearly proved the disbursement of the loan, which the applicant is entitled to realize. Hence, OA is disposed off in the following manner: - (a) TA No.173 of 2023 stands allowed.
(b) Applicant is permitted to realize a sum of Rs.22,76,588.15p with further interest @9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the application till the date of realization in full, from the defendants jointly and severally after deducting all the amounts received / realized by them during the pendency of OA and by sale of other assets of the defendants.
(c) It is made clear that the defendants are personally liable for all such amounts due as ordered above.
(d) Applicant is permitted to realize cost of the proceedings and shall file cost memo within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
(e) The Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of this final order.
12. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.
SD/-
(Dictated to PS, who typed in the system directly, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this 27th day of August, 2026)
EXHIBITS MARKED BY APPLICANT BANK
S. No. Date Description of Documents Exhibit Nos.
1. 06.01.2011 Application submitted by 1st defendant for Rs.6.90 lakhs along with translation A-1
2. 06.01.2011 Deed of guarantee for agricultural advances executed by 2nd defendant A-2
3. 13.01.2011 Agreement for agricultural advances executed by 1st defendant A-3
4. 13.01.2011 Receipt for Rs.2.90 lakhs A-4
5. 20.01.2011 Receipt for Rs.2.00 lakhs A-5
6. 27.01.2011 Receipt for Rs.2.00 lakhs A-6
7. 15.09.2013 Acknowledgement of Debt A-7
8. 29.08.2016 Acknowledgement of Debt A-8
9. 10.09.2018 Legal notice sent to the defendants by the applicant bank A-9
10. Statement of Account – Farm Loan along with Memorandum of Interest A-10
Sd/-
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
NIL
Sd/-