Allowed

Canara Bank v. Anasurya Industries

DRT16 Jun 2025OA/297/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of dues amounting to approximately Rs. 69.59 lakhs from Anasurya Industries. The Tribunal allowed the application, directing the defendant to pay the principal, future interest, and costs, and permitting proceedings against mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Defendant directed to pay principal plus future interest and costs; proceedings against mortgaged properties permitted; Recovery certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Anasurya Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

\oA.No.291l2o24l

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶4

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA.No.297 ot 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Canara Bank, Chaitanyapuri branch, l- 1-904, Siddarthnagar, Khajipet, Warangal - 506 004. Represented by its GPA holder

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

Anasurya Ind ustries, Represented by its proprietor, Sri JaadiNarender, S/o sriJaadiSammaiah, aged 25 Occ: business, H.No.4-10-29, Plot no.1, block no.1B, Sy. No.96/1/A, Autonagar, Plot no.19 part Industrial park, Rampur, Kazipet, Warangal - 506 151.

¶11

Also at

¶12

H.No.7-30, Rudrram village, lvla Iha rromanda l, Jayasha n ka r Bhupalpally - 505 503.

¶13

Defendant

¶14

Counsel for the Parti

¶15

For the Appli For the b*\ j 16JUnm : $.&rr-W

¶16

Sa ngeethaJa iswa I

¶17

S. Maruthi Rao

¶18

(OA. No.297l2024)

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.69,59,359.33ps (Rupees Sixty Nine lakhs Fifty Eight thousand rhree Hundred Fifty Nine and Paise thirty three only) i.e.,

¶21

a) a sum of Rs.62,88,340.62ps in loan A/c No.3959766000058 with future interest @ 12.75o1o p.ainclusive of penalinterest @ 2olo from 29.06.2024 till the date of realization;

¶22

b) a sum of Rs.6,70,018.71ps in loan A/c. t2500I433267 with Future interest @ 9.95%p.aincrusive of penar interest @ 2yo from 29.06.2024 till the date of realization;

¶23

and in defaurt for sare of hypothecated and mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶24

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant firm represented by its proprietor sri JaadiNarender availed term loan facirity of Rs.45.00 rakhs and cash credit of Rs.5.00 lakhs on 08.06.2021. The defendant executed demand promissory note, letter of undertaking, deed of hypothecation regarding machinery and composite roan agreement dated 15.02.2021. The term loan facility is primariry secured by hypothecation of machinery etc and c by equitable mortgage of immovable prope the schedule to OA. After availing the nt failed to comply the terms of $^{t"'l'Et.,ilffi"r} nk classified the account as NpA on

¶25

(OA. No.297l2024)

¶26

t3.L0.2022 and legal notice was issued on 02.07.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant dld not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶27

counsel for defendant filed vakalath but failed to file written statement.

¶28

Sri D. Naresh, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A. 1 to A. 15.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA agarnst the Defendant as prayed for?

¶31

Counsel for defendant filed vakalath but failed to file WS. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.15. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entiUed to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶32

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

¶33

The t firm.is le to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of ,lt t;$\pees sixty Nine takhs Finy Eisht Fifty Nine and Paise thirty three 'dt^trhl8$ ?fr,$"'

¶34

\o^{A.No .297} /2024')

¶35

a) a sum of Rs.62,88,340.62ps in loan A/c No.3959766000058 with future interest @ 12.75olo p.a inclusive of penal interest @ 2olo from 29.06.2024 till the date of realization;

¶36

b)a sum of Rs.6,70,018.71ps in loan A/c. t25001433267 with future interest @ 9.95olo p.a inclusive of penal interest @ 2olo from 29.06.2024 till the date of realization;

¶37

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the hypothecated and mortgaged properties as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due;

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶42

t4. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶43

(Drctated ro the P.A., transcrbed by her, corrected, signed a.d pronounced by me in the open court on thrs the 16th June, 2025)

¶44

sd/-

¶45

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶46

1 6 JUN 2t[5

Canara Bank v. Anasurya Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Anasurya Industries

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

Bank of India versus Bashakarla Mahesh

M S Balaji Poultry Farms versus Bank of Baroda

Santosh Reddy Mamindla versus Shriram Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus Sri. Kanakagalla Narasimha

Hdfc Bank versus Dandugula Venkatesam

State Bank of India versus Smt. Kondam Yellavva