Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sree Sree Enterprises

DRT1 May 2025OA/430/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA.No.430 of 2024, Canara Bank sought recovery of Rs.42 lakhs along with interest against M/s. SreeSree Enterprises and its partners. The bank issued notice under Section 13(3) of the SARFAEMI Act; defendants remained absent. The Tribunal examined bank evidence and held the claim established, ordering repayment and recovery from movables.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability to pay Rs.42,76,722.26; future interest @8.60% p.a.; proceeding against hypothecated movables and properties; costs.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sree Sree Enterprises — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF May, 2O25

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.43O ol 2024

¶5

Between:

¶6

Canara Bank, Hanamkonda branch, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda, Warangal, Telangana - 506 001. Represented by its Principal Officer and Branch manager

¶7

Applica nt

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. SreeSree Enterprises, Represented by its partners, H.No.15-1-350, 2/4

¶10

TS Industrial Area Local Authority,

¶11

Mulugu road, Warangal - 506 007.

¶12

Mr. Dumpala Praveen, s/o Ramulu, aged about 41 years,

¶13

occ: business, R/o H.No.2-4-t204/ 16 & 2-4-1204/17, Plot no.s 38,39,40,41,42 And 43, flat no.502 Kuteer'sVrushabhadri, 5.no.279 of Lashkar Singaram,

¶14

Gandhi nagar, Hanamkonda - 506 002.

¶15

Mrs. DumpalaSoujanya, w/op Praveen, aged about 41 years,

¶16

occ: business, R/o H.No.2-4-1204/t6

¶17

& 2-4-1204/17, Plot no.s 38,39,40,4t,42 And 43, flat no.502 Kuteer'sVrushabhadri, 5.no.279 of Lashkar Singaram, Gandhi nagar, Hanamkonda - 506 002.

¶18

6".e\ c, * 01fiAY206 .iit -^13, .. '3-j,, !ft1ry"o5$/

¶19

(OA.No.430 of 2024)

¶20

And also at

¶21

H.No.3-9-455, Reddy colony, Hanamkonda, Warangal - 506 001^.

¶22

Defendants

¶23

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For the Defendants

Smt N. Indira

Expa rte

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the^{present OA against Defendants for} recovery of a total sum of^{Rs.42,L7,672.26ps (RupeesFortyTwo} Lakhs Seventeen Thousand^{Six hundred Seventy two and} paise twenty six only) with future interest @^{12'600lo p'awith} monthly rests along^{with penal interest@ 4o/o from 22'10'2024} till the date of^{realization and in default for sale of hypothecated} movables as mentioned^{in the schedule to OA.}

¶30

As per the averments^{in the application, the ApplicantBankstates} that defendant no.1 is a^{partnership firmrepresented by its} partners/ defendants 2 & 3 availed^{term loan of Rs'9,50,000/-on} 22.07.2022 and credit^{facility of Rs.30.00 lakhs on 23'Il'2022'The} defendants executed^{guarantee agreementdated 23.11.2022and all}

¶31

necessa ry ur of Applicant bank.^{Afteravailingthe} loa n fa iled to comply the^{terms of sanction,} fltFfi,;m'".;ry hen ed the account as^{NPA and legal} ,tffe^a6o{cqg, ?ffin^.,I W-"n#

¶32

(oA.No.430 of 2024)

¶33

notice was issued on 03.05.2024. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶34

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 09.04.2025.

¶35

¶36

1. Sri P. Ranjit, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined^himself AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked AS Ex.A.1 to A.13.

¶37

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank.}

¶38

The point that arise for consideration^{is whetherthe ApplicantBank is} entitled for the claim made in the OA^{against the Defendantsas} prayed for?

¶39

Defendants remainedexparte. To substantiate^{the case of the} Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the^{Applicant Bank was examined} and he exhibited relevant documents^{as Ex'Al to A.13. In view of} the above, I hold that the Applicant^{Bank has established their claim} made in the OA against the Defendants^{and hencethe ApplicantBank} is entitled to recover the claim^made in^{the OA with futureinterest}

¶40

and costs.

¶41

B. In the resu with costs, as u nder:

¶42

(OA.No.430 of 2024)

¶43

The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to^the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.42,L7,672.26ps^{(Rupees Forty} Two Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Six hundred^{Seventytwo and} paise twenty six only) with future interest @ 8.600lo^{p.a from} 22.10.2024 till the date of realization.

¶44

The Applicant bank^{is entitled to proceedagainst the hypothecated} movables as mentioned^{ln the scheduleto oA towards realization of} the debt due;

¶45

The Applicant Bank^{is also entitled to proceed againstthe person} and^properties of defendants^{No.2 & 3 and properties of defendant} no.1 firm towards^{realization of the debt due.}

¶46

The Applicant Bank^{is entitledto the costs of the OA'}

¶47

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

¶48

Issue Recovery^{certificateaccordingly.}

¶49

Communicate a^{copy of the order to the parties concerned'}

¶50

P.A., transcribed by?her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on
.6h\[J&y,2o2s) r
sd/-
(G. GOPICHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
.:)I oruAyzffi : TRUE
..f
YOs,qA
Qf,,",o*W
Eciili19

¶51

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sree Sree Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Sree Sree Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sandhya Polymers

State Bank of India versus Mr. Venkateshwarlu Puppala

State Bank of India versus Smt Boga Swaraja Laxmi (Died)

Central Bank of India versus M/s. Aiguille Hotels Inc.

State Bank of India versus Sri.Bharat Singh Rajput

M.Yadagiri versus Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas Bank