Canara Bank, Masur, Rept. By its Branch MG V.Rajashekhar Reddy S/o Madhusudhan vs Revaneppa S/o Sannachoudappa Nagannanavar — 59/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o7Rule1&2. Disposed: Uncontested--DECREED on 06th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAHV400004272025
Filing Number
59/2025
Filing Date
03-May-2025
Registration No
59/2025
Registration Date
03-May-2025
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR
Judge
969-Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
06-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DECREED
Last updated 13-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Canara Bank, Masur, Rept. By its Branch MG V.Rajashekhar Reddy S/o Madhusudhan
Adv. U B JOGIHALLI
Respondent(s)
-
1.Revaneppa S/o Sannachoudappa Nagannanavar
-
2.Channabasamma W/o Sannachoudappa Nagannanavar
-
3.Devaraj S Nagannanavar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Mar-2026
Judgment
Summary The court partially decreed Canara Bank's money recovery suit against three agricultural loan defaulters. The court directed defendants to repay Rs. 7,48,854 at 6% annual interest within 6 months from the judgment date; failure to repay would permit the bank to proceed with legal recovery proceedings against the mortgaged property. The court rejected the bank's claim for 11.65% interest, holding that 6% simple interest was appropriate for agricultural loans under the circumstances. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Disposed
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
29-Jan-2026
Judgement
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
10-Dec-2025
Judgement
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
12-Nov-2025
Evidence
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
18-Sep-2025
Evidence
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
11-Jul-2025
Evidence
Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
03-May-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-May-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 59/2025
Summary The court partially decreed Canara Bank's money recovery suit against three agricultural loan defaulters. The court directed defendants to repay Rs. 7,48,854 at 6% annual interest within 6 months from the judgment date; failure to repay would permit the bank to proceed with legal recovery proceedings against the mortgaged property. The court rejected the bank's claim for 11.65% interest, holding that 6% simple interest was appropriate for agricultural loans under the circumstances. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts