Allowed

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Mr. Ravvarapu Vishnu Vardhan

DRT2 Jul 2025OA/435/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed Tata Medantile Bank Ltd.'s OA for recovery of loan against borrowers and guarantor who failed to comply with loan terms, ordering payment of principal, interest, costs, and initiating recovery proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.51,08,043.50 plus interest @ 11.45 p.a. from application date. Recovery certificate issued. Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and respondent's propertie

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Mr. Ravvarapu Vishnu… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL'IAT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE^{2ND DAYOF JULY, 2025}

¶3

PRESENT: SRI^{GUMMADI GOPICHAND,PRESIDING OFFICER} OA.No.435 ot 2024

¶4

Between:

¶5

Tamilnad Mercantile^BankLtd, Branch office at^15-2-696, 1't floor, Siddiamber^bazaar, Kishangunj, HYderabad -^{500 012.} Represented bY its^Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Mr. RavvaraPu^{Vishnu Vardhan,} s/o Mr. Venkatasubba^Rao,

¶9

aged about⁴³ Years,^{occ:business,} R/o H.No.B-3^{-222/BlC/2, Madhura}

¶10

Nagar, Near Sunrise^MedicalshoP, AmeerPet, Yousufguda,

¶11

Hyderabad - 500^038.

¶12

Also at:

¶13

Mr. RavvaraPu^{Vishnu Vardhan,} Sattva Avenue,^{Flat no.302,} Mahadevpur^{colony,Hyderabad} -^{500 055'}

¶14

Mr. Konni simhachalam, s/o Mr. GoPala^{Rao, aged maior,} Rlo 8-3-244/9/2/A,^{2no floor,} Madhuranagar,^{HYderabad-500 038'}

¶15

Defendants

¶16

t?'sF?HPricaHt

¶17

Smt G. Rama^Manoja Expa rte

¶18

(OA. No.435of2024)

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.51,O8,O43.5Ops (Rupees Fifty One Lakhs Eight thousand Forty Three and paise Fifty only) with interest @ 11.45olo p.a with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization and in default for sale of mortgaged immovable property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no.1 herein the borrower and defendant no.2 stood as guarantor availed Term loan of Rs.46.00 lakhs and executed demand promissory note, articles for agreement, letter of undertaking and deposited title deed vide Regd document no.6673/2022 on 19.08.2022. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA and initiated SARFAESI proceedings. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶22

led absent and set exparte on 24.03.2025.

¶23

o?&..16

¶24

(OA.No.435of2024)

¶25

Sri K. Ravindran, Asst. Vice president of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.29.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶27

6' The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the oA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶28

Defendants remainedexparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.29, In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the oA with future interest and costs.

¶29

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

¶30

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.5l,Og,O43.5Ops (Rupees Fifty One Lakhs Eight thousand Forty Three and paise Fifty only) Aq* ll.45o/o p.a from date of applicationtill the date of p;,s".,' : o2.rnilm : b,**'**t"

¶31

(OA.No.435of2O24)

¶32

The Applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged

¶33

property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of

¶34

the debt due.

¶35

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

¶36

The Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the oA.

¶37

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

¶38

Issue Recovery certiFicate accordingly.

¶39

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶40

bv her' corrected, sisned and pronounced bv me in the open court on

¶41

IrifliX;tr"t, #j;i,ij:":;:!i"

¶42

sd/-

¶43

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶44

*
0 ? lur loS
QN,,'"eR$E
Sg,l,lrt

¶45

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Mr. Ravvarapu Vishnu Vardhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Mr. Ravvarapu Vishnu Vardhan

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

Similar cases

Banothu Nilima versus State Bank of India

Nagolu Gopal Reddy versus Union Bank of India

Karur Vysya Bank versus Sri. a. Sita Rama Rao

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Rai Srinivas

.Mr.Syed Hajee Hussain and Another versus State Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Karengular Soumyalatha