Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. v. M/S Renuka Steel and Hardware

DRT5 May 2026OA/139/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Originating Application filed by KarurVysya Bank Ltd. against a firm and its proprietor for recovering an outstanding loan amount of Rs. 21,59,984.12 with interest. The defendants were absent, and the judgment was pronounced ex-parte in favor of the bank.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 21,59,984.12 with 16.50% p.a. interest; direction to issue Recovery Certificate.

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. versus M/S Renuka Steel and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O4th DAY OF MAY, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA. No.139 OF 2026

¶5

Between :

¶6

KarurVysya Bank Ltd. OMC/RA Division, Ground Floor, H.No. 8-2-269110, Plot No.2/A, Trendset Towers, Road No. 2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034, Telangana State Represented by its Authorized Officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Renuka Steel and Hardware,

¶10

Rep. by its Proprietor,

¶11

Mr. Sachin Goel,

¶12

H.No. 4-8-25, Ground Floor,

¶13

Mushak Mahal, Huda Colony,

¶14

Hyderabad - 500 064,

¶15

Mr. Sachin Goel,

¶16

1.' -.r-ii i. t$;:S3r Nagar Colony, Temple,

¶17

048.
J ./ ^il ['il?" fi;'oo' Er:
r<1-d- "' ^ :1,
W--*W

¶18

(OA. No. 139/2026)

¶19

3. Mr.VinodKumar Goel,
S/o.Madanlal Goel,
H.No.4-8-25, SaiNagar Colony,
Attapur NearHanuman Temple,
Attapur,
KV Ranga Reddy-500048.
Counselfor the parties:
ForTheApplicant	LotusLawAssociates
FortheDefendant	Exparte
Reservedon	21.04.2026
Pronouncedon	04.05.2026
Upload inwebsiteon	06.05.2026

¶20

Defendants

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.21,59,984.12 Ps. (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred hty Four and Paise Twelve Only) with interest @16.50% unded monthly rests from the date of this application rea lization.

¶23

W--#

¶24

(OA. No. 139/202 6)

¶25

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant No. 1 is a^{proprietorship} Firm represented by its Proprietor Defendants No. 2 and 3 avaired unsecured business loan of Rs.25,00,000/- repayable in 36 equated monthly installments of Rs.88,510.961 together with interest @i6.SOo/o p.a with monthly rests and executed Loan Agreement dated 31.08.2024 in favor of the Appricant Bank. After avairing the roan facility, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NpA on 03.09.2025 and issued Recalt Notice dated 12.09.2025 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶26

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 21 .04.2026.

¶27

Sri. Tadinada Rama Krishna, Deputy General Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.g.

¶28

5 Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶29

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant entitled for the claim made in the OA against the as prayed for?

/ FtyDt
I'Eirr

(oA. No. 139/2026)

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.'1 , official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.8. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendants and hence the Applicant Bank is entifled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶34

¶35

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs. as under :

¶36

The Defendants No. 1 to 3 are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.21 ,59,9g4.12 ps. (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Fifty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Four and Paise Twelve Only) with interest @16.50%^{p.a from} the date of this application till the date of rea lizatio n.

¶37

The Applicant Bank is also entifled to proceed against the person and properties of Defendants No. 2 and 3 and properties of Defendant No. 1 company towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

That Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA. ffi

¶39

[ [ ilAY ,rrzfi *]l
4
,L" "sV
w#j,Y

¶40

(oA. No. 139/202 6)

¶41

The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶42

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶43

'13

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶45

(Dictated to the P A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 04rh day of May, 2026)

sd/-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFF!CER

ffi%
* [4ilAyrrpF 1
\Jd.
"S","o:*'S;t".8

¶50

taf
,if,''ffiit*'

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. v. M/S Renuka Steel and Hardware

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. v. M/S Renuka Steel and Hardware

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kyramkonda Kanaka Raju versus Encore Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Banothu Jayasinga Raju versus LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Mr Ravulapally Ravichandra versus Union Bank of India

M/S.National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development versus M/S. Navajeevan Organisation

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sri Rama Powerlooms Industry

Canara Bank versus Bharath Power Looms Industry