Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mr. Pokuri Venkateshwar Rao

DRT9 Oct 2025OA/526/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a loan of Rs. 56,30,356.40 along with interest and costs against jointly and severally liable defendants, including sale of mortgaged property and execution of recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Direct recovery of Rs.56,30,356.40 with future interest, direction to release Recovery Certificate, and permission to proceed against mortgaged property and personal assets of defendants.

Canara Bank versus Mr. Pokuri Venkateshwar Rao — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TR]BUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 526 OF 2025

¶6

Canara Bank,, Ramakrishnamath Branch. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

..... Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

14r. Pokuri Venkateshwar Rao S/o. P. Hanumatha Rao H.No.72, 2"d Floor, MIG II KPHB 9th Phase, Near Vijaya Super Market, Hyderabad - 500085.

¶10

Mrs. Pokuri Suvarchala Wo.^{P. VenkateshwarRao} H.No.72,2"d Floor, MIG II KPHB^gth Phase, Near Vijaya Super Market, Hyderabad - 500085.

¶11

Beccun Infrastructures Limited., Represented by its Proprietor Managing Partner/14anaging Director Mr. Prashanth Kumar Puram 102 Model House Punjagutta Hyderabad - 500082.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : Dr. K. Manikyamba

¶14

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶15

:: qLLLL ::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.56,30,356.40ps as on 05.05.2025 from the N{€

¶17

¶18

oA.NO.52612025

¶19

defendants jointly and severally with future interest @9.9olo p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶20

Summons served on D1 and 2, whereas summons sent to D3 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex-parte on 13.09.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined Nithin S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 14 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.14.

¶22

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed through merits. perused the material placed on record.

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶25

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.14 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.

¶26

In the resutt, the present Originat Apptication No.526/2025 is a owed as under: _

¶27

oA.NO.s261202s

¶28

¶29

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.56,30,356.40ps with future interest @8.60%^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of^property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶31

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of its dues;

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶33

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Didated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 09th Day of Octob€r, 2025).

¶36

/fir,^-.u U66tu"'

¶37

lRauesdwen^xornel PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mr. Pokuri Venkateshwar Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mr. Pokuri Venkateshwar Rao

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sri Sai Star Cable Network

B Shylender Kumar versus Repco Bank

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Cjr Projects

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Thellajeera Divakar, S/O Chandraiah

The Hongkong and Shanghal Banking versus Mr. Shaik Basheed, S/O Late Ibraheem

The Axis Bank Ltd., versus Mr. Banda Shravan Kumar