Allowed

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank v. Mr. K Manohar

DRT29 Oct 2025OA/751/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's Original Application for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 92,36,448/- from four defendants. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay loan amounts, interest, costs, and declared hypothecated assets as security for the dues.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 92,36,448/- with interest and costs; hypothecated assets declared security; recovery certificate to be issued.

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank versus Mr. K Manohar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No : 751 0F 2022

¶4

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank., Punganuru Branch, Punganur - 5t7247 Chittoor District, A. P. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. K. Manohar, S/o.Venkataswamy Major, Occ: Business, H.No.3-B5A Resident of Matam Street Punganur - 517247, Chittoor Dist Andhra Pradesh.

¶8

M/s. Sri Dwarakamal Rural Godowns Represented by Mrs.R.Deepa, Major Occ: Business, W/o.R.Rayal Kumar D.No. 28-8315-1, Vinayaka Nagar Kothaindlu, Punganur Town Chittoor Dt, Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

M/s. Sri Balaji Cold Storage Represented by Mr.R.Rayal Kumar Major, Occ: Business, S/o.R.Krishnaiah Chetty, D.No.28-83/5-1, Vinayaka Nagar Kothaindlu, Punganur Town Chittoor Dt, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

Mr.R.Rayal Kumar, S/o.R.Krishnaiah Chetty, Major, Occ: Business D.No. 28-83/5-1, Vinayaka Nagar Kothaindlu, Punganur Town Chittoor Dt, Andhra Pradesh.

¶11

...Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant

: Mr.N.Meher Prasad

Defendants

: Ex-parte Ory*

oa.No.7SLl2022

:: qLLEL^::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of^{Rs.92,36,4481-i.e., a sum of Rs 21,12,694/-towards} Term Loan^{A/c. No.5O005013489 with future interest@14olo} plus 2Vo penal interest^{p.a., a sum of Rs'51,48,138/-towards} SOD Loan^{A/c.No.5OOO8494O 12 with future interest@135olo} plus 2o/o penal interest^{p.a. and a sum of Rs 19'75'616/}

¶19

towards Term^{LoanA/c. No.50008975137with future interest} @14olo^{plus 2o/o penal interestp a. from the defendantsjointly} and severally^{with yearly rests from the date of applicationtill} the date of^{realizationalongwith costs and in defaultfor sale of} hypothecated^assets.

¶20

Summons served^{on D1 to 3 through paper publication'} whereas summons^{sent to D4 returned with endorsement} refused hence,^{deemedto be served They were set ex-parte} on 18.03.2024^{as called absentand no representation'}

¶21

examined Chekka^{Mohan, Assistant}

¶22

1. The Applicant^Bank marked 25 documents^{through himas}

¶23

Manager, as AW-1^and Ex. A.1 to Ex.^A.25.

¶24

Heard the Ld.^{Counselfor the Applicant Bank Perused the} material Placed on^record.

¶25

The^point that arises^{for considerationis:-}

¶26

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{made in theOA against} the Defendants 40d^{OA hypothecated} asset? /rlV-^.vv'// ")^v '//

¶27

oa.NO.757/2022

¶28

¶29

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.25 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the craim of the Appricant 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.

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.757/2022 is allowed as under: -

¶31

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.92,36,448/- i.e., the defendants 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.21,12,694/- towatds Term Loan A/c. No.50005013489, the defendants 1 & 4 are^jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.51,48,138/- towards SOD Loan A/c. No.50008494012 and the defendants 1& 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.19,75,616/- towards Term Loan A/c. No.50008975137; with future interest @14olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of asset described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its OeOt; fl'*.$

¶33

oA.NoJsu2022

¶34

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

¶35

iv)^{the applicant bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶36

The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file CostMemowithin 2 weeks} from the^{date of receipt of this Order'}

¶37

Issue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly'}

¶38

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno,^{.o'i"tt"d,signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the^{29th DaY of october,2025)'}

¶39

fu**

¶40

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank v. Mr. K Manohar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank v. Mr. K Manohar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus v N Narendra Kumar

Mrs Nidamanuri Swaroop Rani versus Axis Bank

Magbul Jan versus Canara Bank

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Rayalaseema Bio Bags.

Karur Vysya Bank Limited versus Veluru Viswanatha Naidu

Uco Bank versus Sri Pankaj Kumar Bhutoria