CANARA BANK vs SMT. LAKSHMAMMA & ORS (HASSAN) on 31 December 2025

FINAL ORDER

1. The present application was filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Bengaluru on 16.02.2016 under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 to recover a sum of Rs. 17,46,979/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakh Forty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Nine Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the application till realization from the defendants. Subsequently, the application was transferred from Debts Recovery Tribunal- I to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No. 2160/2017.

2. It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant No.1 is reported deceased and defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are her legal heirs.

3. It is the case of the applicant that defendants availed farm machinery loan of Rs. 4,90,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh Ninety Thousand Only).

4. It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above amount financed, the defendants executed necessary loan documents along with simple mortgage deed and hypothecation.

5. It is further contended that, the defendants despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, failed in compliance of the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

6. In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal

by filing this TA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

7. Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 22.04.2024.

8. The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the TA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-12 and got the same marked in evidence.

9. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the TA in the light of documentary evidence and the proof affidavit.

10. The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the TA claim as against the defendants? ii) What order are to be passed?

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

11. 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 the availment of credit facilities as stated in the TA, creation of security

interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the accounts. The liability of the defendants and the claim as the amount due is also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

12. Hence in view of the finding arrived herein above, this Tribunal find both these issues in favour of applicant and hence this Tribunal is of the view that TA is liable to be allowed.

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

14. In the result, TA.No.2160/2017, stands allowed,

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum of Rs. 17,46,979/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakh Forty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy Nine Only) with further interest @ 6.00% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing TA till the realization, from the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 jointly, severally & personally after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the schedule property. Properties schedule to the TA be the schedule 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 Nos. 2 to 4 jointly, severally & personally and other assets of the defendants are liable for all such amounts due under the loan accounts.

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceedings 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, are disposed of with this

Final Order.

15. 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 (AJ), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 31st day of December, 2025]. Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK: AW-1: Vaibhav Sonone, Senior Manager, of Applicant Bank.

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

Exhibit Nos. Particulars of Documents A1 The copy of the loan application form submitted by the defendant A2 The copy of the sanction memorandum dated 24.01.2006 A3 The copy of the memorandum of agreement for agricultural loans dated 24.01.2006 A4 & A5 The copies of the registration certificates reflecting the hypothecation of the tractor and trailer A6 The copy of the simple mortgage deed dated 06.01.2006 A7 to A10 The copies of the letter of revivals dated 10.12.2013 A11 The copy of the statement of account along with banker’s book of evidence pertaining to above loan account A12 The copy of the notice dated 03.09.2014

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil - List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER