Allowed

Canara Bank v. Ganapathiraju Praneel Varma

DRT9 Sept 2025OA/76/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal II at Hyderabad allowed an original application filed by Canara Bank against two defendants. Being the cases ex-parte, the Tribunal held that the evidence and documents clinched the bank's claim for recovery.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants liable to pay Rs. 1,14,04,107.06 with interest; OA claim secured by mortgage; Recovery Certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus Ganapathiraju Praneel Varma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{O9THDAY OF SEPTEMBER,2025}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE,B'COM., L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 76 OF 2025

¶4

Canara Ba n k., Ameerpet - 2 Branch, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ganapathiraju praneel Varma S/o. Sri Satyanarayana Raju Aged Major, Occ: Business 9., Eglinton AVE E, Toronto ONN Canada, M2N2S2.

¶8

Also at:H.No. 15_26_86, Nagendra Colony yatamanch ili Mandal, v["tr,.p"il,"m_530 1 55.

¶9

Matta Anand Goud, 1s.:d^{y{9r, o..,;;f;:ri NasaiahGoud} H.No.2_72, veroanoa virtile ano Mandat Mahabub Nagar Discflct _ 509360.

¶10

... Defendants

¶11

Counset For the Applicant : M/s. T.Nagender Defendants

¶12

: Ex_parte

¶13

I ne Applicant Ban sum or j,"^presenr oA r (or the recoverv a total ^r.r,ro,ol:l"j o 7 o6ps' ,,.;; ;" severary *iti, rrtrl^ uefendants iointly and monthly rests from l.interest^t"'** with costs uno,, 0u,11,12'2024^{t';t;"';i "compoundedwith} ,raurt ror ruiu or;;;::::.earizarion arons rouie propertv. rrnrr. _1..r .,r..\t

oA.NO.76/2O2s

Summons served on D1 through paper publication, whereas summons served on D2. They were set ex_parte on 22.0g.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined G.Meghanadh, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A. 1 to Ex. A.12.

¶19

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported^{orders may be} passed through merits. Perused the^{materialplaced on record'}

¶20

The point that arises^{for consideration is:-}

¶21

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the^{claim madein the OA against} the^{Defendantsand OA schedule} ProPertY?

¶22

¶23

As stated^{supra' the Defendants remained ex-parte'The} Evidence^{Affidavit coupledwith the recitals in the documents} viz.,^{Exs'A'1to A'12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches^{the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} are^{jointly and severally liable}

¶24

Hence,^{I hold that tn"} '"ndunts to^{pay the OA tfui} to the Applicant Bank with futureinterest and^costs' ln^{the result' the present Original Application No'76/2025 is}

¶25

7 . allowed^{as under:-}

¶26

i)^{rhe Defendants "'"} ':l::']t ;::-^:"ff"; tiabte^{to pav to the opp'llln} ,u,ur"^interest

¶27

Rs'1'14'04'107'06Ps^{with "'[n'i^f}

¶28

¶29

oA.NO.76l2025

¶30

@7.20o/o^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till the date of^realization;

¶31

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 debU

¶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 within2 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 ogth Day of September, 2025).

¶37

PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Ganapathiraju Praneel Varma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Ganapathiraju Praneel Varma

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

Smt Syeda Kulsum Fatima versus Indian Overseas Bank

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Ragineni Viswa Mohan

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sai Global Yarntex (India) Private Limited

Canara Bank (e-Syndicate Bank) versus M/S. Bright Waste Technologies

Canara Bank versus Boya Moolinti Parvathamma

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Laxmi Durga Wines