Allowed

M/S. Canara Bank v. Mdh Bikes

DRT10 Nov 2025OA/484/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank. It held the Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,18,28,451.56 with future interest, granted recovery against a hypothecated vehicle, and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 1,18,28,451.56 with future interest; Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendants' properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

M/S. Canara Bank versus Mdh Bikes — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1OTH DAY OF NOVEMBER,2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB.^{(Hons.), M.A.}

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 484 OF²⁰²⁵

¶6

M/s. Canara Bank., Kadapa Chinnachowk Branch Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh - 516001. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

MDH Bikes.,

¶10

House No.10 /3lO-1,^{MYdukur Road} Proddutur, YSR Dist,^{Kadapa-516360.} Rep by Shaik Mohammed^Naveed 6-3-609/172, Flat^No'304,Anand Heights, Anand Nagar^{Colony, Khairthabad} Hyderabad - 500004.

¶11

Shaik Mohammed^Naveed

¶12

S/o. Shaik^{Abdul Sattar} Aged about 56^{Years,HouseNo.B/164} A[mas Peta, Cuddapah,^{Andhra Pradesh-516001'}

¶13

Smt, Shaik^MalikaShahaz

¶14

W/o. Shaik Mohammed^Naveed Aged about 55^{Years,HouseNo.8/164} Almas Peta, Cuddapah,^{Andhra Pradesh-516001'}

¶15

...Defendants

¶16

Counsel for^the Applicant : M/s' D'L'Kiran^Prakash

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: ORDER::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.1,18,28,451.56ps^{from the dffendantsjointly and} /lV,rU/ 16"'

¶21

oA.NO.484/2025

¶22

severally with future interest @9.757o p.a. compounded with monthly from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶23

Summons served on D2 & 3, whereas summons sent to Dl returned with endorsement unclaimed hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex-parte on 17.07.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶24

The Applicant Bank examined Kollanoor Sekhar^yeswanth, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.10.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the written arguments and material placed on record.

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶28

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.10 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the presegloriginat Application No.4,4/ZO2S is arrowed as under: - //)y---*, u'ton

¶30

oA.NO.484/2025

¶31

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.1,18,28,451.56ps^{with future lnterest} @9.75olo^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till^{the date of realization;}

¶32

ii) the OA claim is^{secured bY waYof} hypothecation oF vehicle^{described in the} schedule annexed to the^{OA and the} applicant bank^{is entitledto proceed against} the same to realise^{its debu}

¶33

iii) the applicant bank^{is also entitledto proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendants^{for realization of its dues;}

¶34

iv) the applicant^{bankis entitledfor the costs'}

¶35

The Applica nt Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{thls Order.}

¶36

Issue Recovery^{Certificateaccordingly'}

¶37

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} 1oia,u,"d^{to,h" r,"no, corrected,signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the loth^{Day ot November, 2025).}

¶38

HWAR KOTHE) IDING OFFICER

M/S. Canara Bank v. Mdh Bikes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Canara Bank v. Mdh Bikes

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

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Mavurappu Saritha, D/O Mr. J. Muthyalu

Bank of India versus Mr. Sriniwaas Kotaa

Bank of India versus Sri Sai Pradeep Keetharaju

Icici Bank Limited versus Bandogi Santosh Kumar

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Kiran Granites and Minerals

State Bank of India versus Mr. Dharam Singh