Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. Rishikanth Varma

DRT18 Oct 2025OA/253/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Court allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of a financial default. The bank demonstrated NPA classification and mortgage, leading to a liability order against individual borrowers and the builder.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.46,01,626 with interest at 8.90% p.a. from date of application. Recovery certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Sri. Rishikanth Varma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 17rH DAy oF OCTOBER | 2025

¶2

PRESENT: sRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESTDING OFFICER

¶3

OA.No.253 of 2O2S

¶4

Between:

¶5

Canara Bank, Ramakrishna Math Branch, Ramakrishna Math campus, f11-ra^{garf road,Domaisuda,} Hyderabad - 500 029. Represented by its Manager cum Authorised officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri Rishikanth Varma,

¶9

:{o^{R.B.Varma, aged abour} +J years, occ: employee, R/o plot no.58 & Sg, ilat'no.202, Yashasree Apartments, Near Vi:iya- r-,v I_uo,r.g^{home, Kranthihills,} Vanasthalipuram, Ranga Reddv utstnct, Hyderabad _ 500 O7O.

¶10

And also at:

¶11

#plot no.90, Jawahar Rail colony, Road no.2, Lane no.4, Jupiter Colony, Bowenpally, Manovikas rrragar Tirumalgiri, Hyderabad _ 09.

¶12

Mrs. Aruna Varma, w/o sri Rishikant Varma, aged about 43 years, occ: employee, R/o.ptot no.58 & 59, ftat ni.z[)-,,'", Ya.shasree Apa rtments, Nea r Vuaya Nursing home, Kranthi hills, X1l.:_lh:lipy^{ram, Ra nsa Reddy} ulsrnct, Hyderabad _ 5OO O7O:

¶13

(oA.No.2s3l202s)

¶14

And also at:

¶15

#plot no.90, Jawahar Rail colony, Road no.2, Lane no.4, Jupiter Colony, Bowenpally, Manovikas Nagar Tirumalgiri, Hyderabad _ 09.

¶16

M/s, Beccun Infrastructure Limited, Lepps-ented^{by its Managing Oiiecior,} Mr.^{p. prashant} Kumar and Mr. Ratan^prasad, Director, Regd office at 102, Model house, pun;agutta, Hyderabad _ 500 082.

¶17

Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the parties: For the Applicant Sri M. Srinivas For the Defendants 1& 2 Exparte Defendant no.3 Sri B.N. Radha Krishna^yadav Reserved on 15.10.2025 Pronounced on 17.10.2025 Uploaded in website on 18.10.2025

¶19

ORDER

¶20

1' The Appricant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.46,01,626/_ (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs One Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Six only) with

¶21

interest @ usive of penal interest @ 2%) from date of appl t{6 lization and in default for sale of TT"dtY ?ffi"': in the schedule to OA. e , :"n *;

¶22

(oA.No.2s3l202s)

¶23

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendants no'1 and 2 are borrower and co-borrower entered into agreement of purchase of frat from defendant no.3 who undertook to construct the flat. Defendants t and 2 availed housing loan of Rs.49.00 lakhs and executed necessary documents. Defendant no.3 under the obligation of obtaining occupancy certificate mortgaged the schedure mentioned property in favour of appricant bank. After avairing the loan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA on 28.tL2024 and legal notice was issued on 19.05.2025. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the deFendants did not crear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶24

Defendants No.1 and 2 called absent and set exparte on 0g.09.2025. Sri B.N. Radhakrishna yadav filed vakalath on behalf of defendant no.3 but failed to fite WS.

¶25

Sri S. Nithin, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.9.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶27

The point th at arise for consideration n i s wheth er the Applicant Bank is entifled for the. clim rq" inr5e .' COA aga inst the Defendants as 'i\ ,E i prayed for? : ,i,r, ,=i ., , .\ .^ i,-* 170[T)1'l?5 ll !,r rll 'i"..J r :1^*i ; \ -'a \1'-i, ,:.r'-^;'1.- * ..,,:,.il.r. ;Xi;:!:i;f-".1i.'.,:1i,.,

¶28

(oA.No.2s3l202s)

¶29

Defendants 1& 2 remained exparte. Defendant no,3 filed vakalath but failed to file WS. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he exhibited rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.9. 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 entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶30

B. In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendants are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.46,01,626l- (Rupees Forty Six Lakhs One Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Six only) with interest @ 8.90o/o p.a fronr date of apprication tilr the date of rearization.

¶31

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶32

property as ment;rned in the schedule to OA towards realisation of

¶33

the debt due.

¶34

The Applicanl Bank is also enti tled to proceed against the person and

¶35

prop,erties of defendants No.1 and 2 and properties of defendant no.3

¶36

firm towards r,:r1_;-z_p[ion of the debt due. _ :='!

¶37

.,2'aq,ii -"'::':^{';#l,i}..</sup>}

¶38

The ,to^{the costs of the OA.} ,i

¶39

ffi"t;*''J"?rfi ii:^1IBCT,'r2s I t1 l_^.ri ^-Iiiilit

¶40

-sry 4

¶41

(oA.No.2s31202s)

¶42

12' The Appricant shaI fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date

¶43

of receipt of order.

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶45

Communicate a cooy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶46

lf;:ctiji^j: ["rr;l;J"i'JjiT. by her, correded, sisned and pronounced by me in the open court on

¶47

sdl-

¶48

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶49

ItYe%{
Asst.
-.':T ,, t

Canara Bank v. Sri. Rishikanth Varma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. Rishikanth Varma

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

Ganneboina Vanitha versus LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Smt Bompelly Karuna versus Apsfc

State Bank of India versus M/S. R. S Filling Station

Punjab National Bank versus M/S. Sree Krishna Tractors

Om Sri Bhavani Industries versus Punjab and Sind Bank

Dugyala Venkat Rao versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.