Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Maha Ganapathi Trading

DRT13 Dec 2024OA/293/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an OA filed by Canara Bank against definition for recovery of loan availed under CGTMSE. The court held the bank established its claim due to defendant absence and ordered payment of principal, interest, and costs.

What did the court decide?

The Defendant were ordered to jointly and severally pay the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.58,50,788.33 with future interest @ 11.50% p.a. from 01.05.2024.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Maha Ganapathi Trading — DRT (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER'2c.24

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶3

OA.No.293 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Canara Bank, MSME Sulabh Warangal I branch, H.No.2-10-823/ t, L ftoor, Orugallu complex, Opp forest office, Subedari, Hanamkonda - 506 001. Represented by its Senior Manager Cum Authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. MahaGanapathi Trading Represented by its partners, H .No.66-5-123, Stambhampally, Warangal - 506 330.

¶9

Mr. Bandi Sandeep, S/o Ramesh, aged major, Male, occ: business, H.No. 15-205/1, Sarojini Devi Street, Narsampet, Warangal - 506 132.

¶10

Mrs.Bandipravalika, w/o Sandeep, aged major, female, occ: business, H.No. 15-205/1, Sarojini Devi Street, Narsampet, Warangal - 506 132.

¶11

Counsel for the^parties: For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶12

,1.& - "4H
..:v eb
13 0EC2m
C!'uul-i
ndants
'"'.1 r:X, -a] .V
\r"<br>-al:.;-',
.k;tt&'
S

Exparte

(OA.No.293/2024)

ORDER

1' The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.5g,5o,7gg.33ps (Rupees Fifty Eight Lakhs Fifty Thousand Seven hundred Eighty Eight and paise Thirty three only) with further interest @ 11.50o/o p.a with monthry rests from 0t.05.2024 tiil the date of rearization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as described in the schedule to OA.

¶17

2' As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant No.1 is a partnership firm represented by its partners /defendants no.2 & 3 availed Rs.50.00 lakhs on 01.08.2022 under the CGTMSE scheme. The defendants hypothecated the machinery belonging to defendant no.1 more fuily described in the schedure to oA as a security to the credit facirity avaired by them. Defendants 2 & 3 being guarantors executed guarantee agreement dated 03.08.2022 infavour of Applicant bank. After availing the loan facirity, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank was constrained to crassify the accou-nt as NpA and issued notice dated 11. several req uests and demands, the defendan.Lfff;no, ffi,. ,;J nding. Hence this OA,

¶18

Defendants called absent a

¶19

7,iD'{

¶20

(oA. No.293/2024)

¶21

Sri MdNadimulHaque, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶22

examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited releva nt documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.7.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶25

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶26

7' Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.7. In view of the above, I hold that the Appricant Bank has estabrished their craim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶27

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under:

¶28

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the

¶29

Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.58,5O,788.33ps (Rupees Fifty Eight Lakhs Fifty hundred Eighty Eight and

¶30

paise rhirtv,n'gpl-i*S;):,m r;LftN,"rest @ 11.s0% p.a rrom 01.0s.2024tiil thdidEte *f ftiftifli ':1

¶31

(OA.No.293/2024)

¶32

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as described in schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶33

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶35

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶36

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13th day of Dec,2024)

¶39

sdl_ (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶40

130ECmt

¶41

trYT%
,a:i,{"##;^,

¶42

Canara Bank v. M/S. Maha Ganapathi Trading

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Maha Ganapathi Trading

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

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Om Sree Venkatanameswara Prelam Private Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Mantena Laboratories Ltd.

Mr Arepula Yadagiri versus Bank of Baroda

Bank of India versus Dindigala Purushotham

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Zahada Mohammed (Died)

State Bank of India versus M/s. Paramount Solutions