CANARA BANK vs SMT. BORAMMA & ORS (HASSAN) on 19 June 2026

:FINAL ORDER:

1. 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.14,31,438/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Thirty One Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Eight only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

2. It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants No.2,3,4 & 5 along with deceased defendant No.1 and 3 availed Farm Machinery loan to an extent of Rs.4,70,000/- on 21.12.2005.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 07.10.2025.

7. 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 A9 and got the same marked in evidence.

8. 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.

9. The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants? ii) What order are to be passed? Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

10. 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, 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 the limitation.

11. 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.

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facility was availed for agricultural 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 6.00% p.a.(simple).

13. In the result, TA.No.163/2017 stands allowed, i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs.14,31,438/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Thirty One Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Eight only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing TA till the realization from the defendants No.2, 3, 4 and 5 and defendant No.1(a) & (b) and defendant No.3(a) to (c) to the extent of inheritance of any estate from the deceased borrowers/guarantors, after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants No.2,3,4 and 5 jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the TA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate. ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants No.2,3,4 and 5 jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts. 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. iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution. v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

14. 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. [Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 19th Day of June 2026].

Sd/-- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK: AW-1: Sri. Vaibhav G Sonone, Legal Manager of the applicant bank. Exhibits on the part of the Applicant: Sl. No . Description of Documents Exhibit Number

Original loan application form dated 21.12.2005 A1

Original sanction memorandum dated 21.12.2005 A2

Original memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 21.12.2005 A3

Original RC book reflecting hypothecation in the name of the applicant bank A4 & A5

The original simple mortgage deed dated 16.12.2005 A6

Original letter of revival dated 18.06.2013 A7

The original statement of accounts along with Bankers Book of Evidence A8

The original legal notice dated 01.01.2015 A9

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER