Allowed

Canara Bank v. Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu

DRT15 Sept 2025OA/543/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal at Hyderabad heard an Original Application by Canara Bank demanding recovery of loans against three ex-parte respondents. The court found the claim established by documentary evidence and allowed the application, ordering payment of dues, sale of hypothecated vehicle, and issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to jointly and severally pay Rs.27,08,561.45 with future interest and costs; sale of hypothecated vehicle directed; Recovery Certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1sTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 543 OF 2025

¶6

Canara Bank.,

¶7

Vidupanakal Branch, Main Road Bommanahal Road, Near Bus Stand Vidupanakal. Anantapur

¶8

Andhra Pradesh - 515870. Rep. by its Manager.

¶9

.... Applicant.

¶10

Versus

¶11

Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu S/o, M.Rangappa, R/o.OC Colony Ramapuram Kottala Vidupanakal Kothakota, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh-51S870.

¶12

Maddipatla Hareesh Kumar S/o. M.Somasekhar Naidu, R/o.OC Colony Ramapuram Kottala Vidupanakal Kothakota, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh-515870.

¶13

Maddipatla Ram Mohan Chowdari S/o. M. Somasekhar Naidu, R/o.OC Colony Ramapuram Kottala Vidupanaka I Kothakota, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh-515870.

¶14

...Defendants

¶15

: M/s.P.Sai Chandrasekhar Counsel for the Applicant Defendants : Ex-parte

¶16

:: CLLD-LL ::

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.27,08,561.45ps towards Loan Alc. Nos. TfiYronr l/

¶18

oA.NO.543/202s

¶19

¶20

182000323365, 31298010058868 KCC Loan,^182001815698 Crop Loan from the defendants^{jointly and severallywith future} interest @11.90o/o^p.a. from 19.03.2025 till^{the date of} realization along with costs and in default for^{sale of} hypothecated vehicle.

¶21

Summons served on D1 to 3.^{They were set ex-parteon} 29.O7 .2025 as called absent and^{no representation.}

¶22

The Applicant Bank examined K.Lakshimlpathi Naik,^Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through^himas Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.10.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^{Perused the} material^placed on record.

¶24

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶25

whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶26

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Atfidavit 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 jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶27

In the result, the present Oriqinal Application No.543/2025 is allowed as under:^- Yrr'e

¶28

¶29

oA.NO.s43l2025

¶30

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.27,08,561.45ps towards Loan A/c. Nos. 182000323365, 31298010058868 KCC Loan, 182001815698 Crop Loan; with future interest @10.40olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

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

¶35

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1.5th Day of September, 2025).

¶37

Y*Nte

¶38

SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Harini Trading Company

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Pranav Sai Agencies

M/S. Uco Bank versus Tarakarama Educational Society

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Krishna Marketing