Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Goree Chandrakala

DRT12 Nov 2025OA/280/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad allowed an Original Application filed by Bank of Maharashtra to recover Rs. 39,90,567.00 with interest from borrowers who defaulted on housing and term loans, validating recovery proceedings including sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra allowed to recover Rs.39,90,567.00 with interest and proceed against mortgaged and other properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Goree Chandrakala — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL -t AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 12Ih DAY OF NOVEMBER,2025

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI cOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA. No. 280 OF 2025

¶4

Between :

¶5

Bank of Maharashtra, Miyapur Branch, Hyderabad,

¶6

Represented by its Authorized Officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Goree Chandrakala, Wo. Gorre Naresh, Age44 Occ: Business, Flat No. 509, DevdarApartments, Street No. 10, Haripriya Nagar,

¶10

Siddipet - 502 103 TS.

¶11

Also at :

¶12

H.No. 1 1-2-1081214, Bharath Nagar, Siddipet - 502 103 TS

¶13

Goree Naresh, S/o. Gorre Rangaiah, Age44 Occ: Business,

¶14

Flat No. 509, Devdar Apartments, Street No. 10, Haripriya Nagar,

¶15

Siddipet - 502 103 TS.

1 #0t,

(oA. No. 280/202s)

Also at :

H.No. 1 1-2-108121A, Bharath Nagar,

¶20

Siddipet - 502 103 TS.

¶21

M/s. Thirumal Sarees, Rep. by its Proprietor Goree Chandrakala, Street No. 10, Haripriya Nagar, Siddipet - 502 103 TS. Defendants

¶22

Counsel forthe parties:
For TheApplicant	Adrian KiranRaj
FortheDefendant	Exparte
Reservedon	07.11.2025
Pronouncedon	12.11.2025
Uploadinwebsiteon	13.11.2025

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.39,90,567.00 Ps/- (Rupees Thifi Ninety Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty Seven with interest @ 12.05% p.a with monthty rests

¶25

¶26

(oA. No. 280/202s)

¶27

from 30.04.2025 till the date of realization and in default for sale of Mortgaged Property as mentioned in the Schedule to OA.

¶28

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states defendant no.1 borrower and Defendant no. 2 Co-applicant availed Term loan under Maha super Housing Loan of Rs.3'l Lakhs with interest @ 8.90% p.a with monthly rests and the defendants executed Facility Agreement for Housing Loan daled 20.01.2023 in favor of the applicant bank. The Defendant no. 3 availed Term loan of Rs.9 Lakhs with interest @ 12.05% p.a with monthly rests and executed Hypothecation agreement for term loan dated 08.04.2024 in favor of the applicant bank. The defendants created Equitable mortgage morefully mentioned in Schedule to OA and defendants no. 2 and 3 had executed Memorandum of Record of Deposit Title deeds on 23.01.2023 and defendant no. 3 executed Supplemental Memorandum of record of Deposit Title Deeds on 23.01.2023 in favor of the applicant bank. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA and issued Demand notice on 13.03.2025 under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶29

bsent and set exparte on 13.10.2025.
12 ?tffi

¶30

(oA. No. 280/2025)

¶31

Mr. S. Ashok Chakravarthi, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.20.

¶32

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶33

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Appricant bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶34

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, officiat of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.20. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim 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.

¶35

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under :

¶36

and severally liable to pay of Rs.39,90,567.00 Ps/Thousand Five Hundred and interest @ 12.05% p.a from date of realization. /1&-/k *", 12 4

¶37

¶38

(oA. No. 280/202s)

¶39

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Mortgaged Property mentioned in the Schedule to the OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶40

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant nos. 2 and 3 and properties of defendant no. 1 towards realization of the debt due.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶45

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the^'12th day of Nov, 2025)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

12Nl.M

0:w
o#--i rVoEnr'uo'

Bank of Maharashtra v. Goree Chandrakala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Goree Chandrakala

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Marisetti Venkata Krishna Rao versus Axis Bank

Bank of India versus Mr. Bhaskar Voruganti

Smt.Gorripati Padma Tulasi versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr. Komatireddy Bhoji Reddy

Ismath Saniya versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Smt. Shaik Dilshad Begum