Allowed

M/S. Canara Bank v. Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi

DRT11 Dec 2025OA/744/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal (NCLT) allowed the Original Application filed by M/s. Canara Bank for recovery of loan dues from the defendant who remained ex-parte. The Tribunal held the defendant liable to pay the principal, future interest, and costs, and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate with permission to proceed against hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Order allowing the original application; directing payment of principal, future interest, and costs; permitting sale of hypothecated vehicle; issuing Recovery Certificate.

M/S. Canara Bank versus Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 744 0F 2025

¶4

M/s. Canara Bank., NGO Colony Cudappah Branch, Kadapa. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory. .....Applica nt.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi W/o. Sri Chalaama Ramanjaneyulu Age about 43 Years, Occ: Business 3-8-A, Mallela Cudappah - 516401.

¶7

... Defendant

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant

Ms. Sangeeta Jaiswal

Defendant

Ex-pa rte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.32,60,388.20ps i.e., a sum of Rs.32,30,069.83ps towards Loan A/c.No.170006439624 with future interest @13.45%^p.a. and a sum of Rs.30,318.37ps towards Loan A/c.No.125002930277 with future interest @11.50o/o p.a. from the defendant with monthly rests from 28.05.2025 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶14

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex-parte on 16.10.2025 as called absent and Ao- representation.

¶15

ffi'"Le'

¶16

oA.NO.7 44l2O2s

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Kotagiri Vijaya Krishna, Manager, as AW-1 and marked 19 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.19.

¶18

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

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.19 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.744/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.32,60,388.20ps i.€., a sum of Rs.32,30,069.83ps towards Loan A/c. No. t70006439624 and a sum of Rs.30,318.37ps towards Loan A/c. No. 125002930277; with future interest @11.35o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date-of realization; Ow*

¶24

oA.NO.744l2O2s

¶25

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;

¶26

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

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶28

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

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

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 11th Day of December, 2025).

¶31

PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Canara Bank v. Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Canara Bank v. Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi

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

Canara Bank versus M/s. Bheeshma Jute Industries Private Limited.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Maya Ladies Corner

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Mr. Thandu Srinivasulu

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Pathan Fairoz Khan

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Tanguturi Sai Krishna

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. T. Srinivas Reddy