Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S. Dharneesh Gold Private Limited

DRT4 Feb 2026OA/144/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. for recovery of loan principal and interest. The Tribunal held that the bank established the defendants' liability through evidence of executed loan documents and working capital facility availed. The order directed the defendants to pay the claimed sum with interest.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of joint liability to pay total sum of Rs. 10,13,19,823.72 (principal + interest). Order to proceed against mortgaged property and properties of guarantors. Recovery certificate issued.

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S. Dharneesh Gold… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 20,26

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING oFFICER

¶4

OA.No.144 of 2O23

¶5

Between:

¶6

The Karur Vysya Bank Limited, Assets Recovery branch, D.No,5-8-356 to 362, 3d floor, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad - 500 001. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Dharneesh Gold private Limited, Represented by its Directors Mr. Kunal Gupta S/o Ramanlal Agarwal, registered office at

¶10

5-9-22/ 1A/ 7t1l33, ftat no.31,

¶11

Maheswari Residency, Adarsh nagar, Basheerbagh road, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶12

Mr. Kunal Gupta, s/o Ramanlal Agarwal,

¶13

male, major, occ: business, Director M/s. Dharneesh Gold pvt Ltd, office at 5-9 -22 / tA/ Ltt / 33, flat no.31, Maheswari Residency, Adarsh nagar, Basheerbagh road, Hyderabad - 500 029,

¶14

Also at :

¶15

,:'"di
0 4 FEB 2026

¶16

#1-2-303, flat no.303, SNR Legend, Opp Bharat Super Market, Gaganmahal road, Domalguda, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶17

(oA.No.14al2023)

¶18

Mrs. Shilpa Agarwarl, w/o Nithin Kumar Agarwal,

¶19

female, major, occ: business,

¶20

director M/s. Dharneesh Gold pvt ltd, office at 5-9-25 / I Al tt I / 33, flat no.31, Maheswari Residency, Adarsh nagar, Basheerbagh road, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶21

Mr. Nithin Kumar Agarwal, s/o Vishwanath Agarwal, male, major, occ: business, s-9-2sltA/ttt/33,

¶22

flat no.31, Maheswari Residency, Adarsh nagar, Basheerbagh road, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶23

Mrs. Durga Agarwal, w/o Kunal Gupta, female, major, occ: business , #7-2-303, flat no.303, SNR Legend, Opp Bharat Supermarket, Gaganmahal road, Domalguda, Hyderabad - 500 029.

¶24

Defendants

¶25

Counsel for the Parties:

For the Applicant

For defendants

Reserved on

Sri Lanka Jagannadham

Sri Sharad Sanghi

06.01.2025

Pronounced on

04.02.2026

Uploaded in website on^-

¶35

04.02.2026

¶36

*B "b\ The-Applicant #*nl filed the present OA against Defendants for .t I' r, r cca ltl?f, tsr ilt: i recovery of a,fotal sum of Rs.1or13r98,232.72ps (Rupees Ten ) Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Two hundred

¶37

paise Seventy Two only) i.e.,

¶38

¶39

(oA.No.14412023)

¶40

A) A sum of Rs.g,42,g4,O21.B6ps in loan account no.1410280000000709 with interest @16.15% p.a with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶41

B) A sum of Rs.71,O4,21O.g6ps in loan account no.1410960000000051 with interest @10.55o/o p.a with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization ;

¶42

and in default for sale of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶43

The averments made in the OA in brief are as follows:

¶44

Defendant No.1 is a Private Limited Company represented by its director Defendant no.2 and defendants No.2 to 5 stood as guarantors availed cash credit facility of Rs.1.00 Crore on 22.LO.2OLB. The defendants executed agreement for secured overdraft, agreement for hypothecation of goods received under letter of credit, general credit facility agreement, supplementary agreement - primary security for one facility to be the collateral security, Defendant no.2 created the property and deposited the regd original sale deed 018 bearing no.2452/20t8 with the Applicant bank. c.eateo charse over the property and deposited resd 04 Pr-"J,"i,,?f",-*$ original salpldled dated 18.11.2015 bearing No.2006/2015 with the Defendant no.4 created charge over the property and the regd original sale deed dated 02.11.2018. It is

¶45

(oA.No.1aal2023)

¶46

submitted by the Applicant bank that the Defendants having availed the said loan facilities failed to keep up the repayment schedule, as such the account was classified as NPA on 23.03.2021 and the Applicant bank issued legal notice dated 15.03.2023 directing the defendant to repay the outstanding amount. Inspite of demands made by Applicant the defendant has not regularized the account, and did not come forward to repay the same. The total claim of Applicant against defendant is Rs.1Or13198,232.72ps (Rupees Ten Crores Thirteen Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Two hundred Thirty two and paise Seventy Two only) with interest @16.15olo p.a and @ 10.550/o p.a respectively with monthly rests from date of application till the date of realization. Hence the OA.

¶47

Defendants No.1 to 5 filed Written statement and denied the averments made in the OA. The defendants contended that the loan documents have been executed on 22.7.2018 and the OA was filed in 2023 is barred by Iimitation. It is denied that the defendants deposited the original sale deeds and documents with the Applicant bank. It is contended that the applicant bank has not adhered to the guidelines provided by RBI while classifying the account as NPA. It is further e Applicant bank took signatures of defendants on Hence the OA is liable to be dismissed.

v$"blank

B{TFB

E,-rt

(OA.No.144/2023)

During the course of trial on behalf of Applicant^Bank, Sri^P.N.S.V. Chalapathi Rao, Senior Manager is examined as AW.1 and through^him marked 18 documents as Ex.A.1 to A.18. Defendants t and 2 examined themselves as DW.1 and DW.2 and not filed any documents.

¶55

I have^perused the documents^placed on record.

¶56

Heard the arguments.

¶57

Now, the points that arise for consideration are:

¶58

i) Whether the Applicant Bank has^proved its claim as made in OA against the defendants ?

¶59

ii) To what relief ?

¶60

Point No.i):

¶61

The speciflc contention of the applicant bank is that defendants availed working capital facility of Rs.1.00 Crore and LClBGs of Rs.10.00 crores. No separate account is maintained for^LClBank guarantee. Whenever LC/BG is invoked, the same is reflected in ng capital account. The 4 devolved BG amounts are debited :..^{.irFE.,^trd{} fl**'ErtuS$qccount .6\ :,F^{on 19.032.2020and 20.03.2020morefully} iP 4? rerrecl$\ the statement of account. The specific contention of ; * .i 0 4 . rtnt?iB6nppfHnt --^-^".i bank is that the defendant no.1 company availed 9' fa c i l ltripts-/jnd tri.es". executed necessary documents and the bank^is ,l* -:"-> ./i ,^{'.,.r,i.,r;l?\q$//} ---1!;;;gg'n!]Et to 30/o overdue charges towards penal interest.

¶62

(OA.No.14412023)

¶63

9, On behalf of applicant bank AW.1 is examined and he exhibited documents Ex.A.1 to A.18. Even though AW.1 is cross examined by the counsel for the defendants, nothing is elicited in the cross examination to disprove their testimony. Defendants examined as DW.1 and DW.2 but not filed any documents. The Evidence of AW.1, the documents filed by the applicant bank clearly establish the liability of the defendants. The evidence of DW.1 and DW.2 is no way helpful to the defendants for establishing their defence. So considering all the circumstances, I hold that the Applicant bank had established its claim against the defendants. So this point is answered accordingly in favour of the Applicant bank and against the defendants.

¶64

Point No.ii)

¶65

In the result, the^present Original application is allowed with costs as under:

¶66

f&q

¶67

The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay the Applicant Bank a total sum Rs.1O,13198,232.72ps (Rupees Ten Crores Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Two hundred Thirty paise Seventy Two only) i.e.,

¶68

acco u nt 4*]!sum of Rs.9,42,94,021.86ps in loan ,1^oqrEBfl?* p.a from the np.141O280000000709 with^interest @16.15olo . .date of application till the date of realization

¶69

(oA.No.14412023)

¶70

B) A sum of Rs.71,04,210.86ps in loan account no.1410960000000051 with interest @10.55o/o p.a from the date of application till the date of realization ;

¶71

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against mortgaged property towards realization of the debt due.

¶72

L2, The Applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants No.2 to 5 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶73

The Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶74

t4. The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶75

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶76

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶77

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on

¶78

sdl-

¶79

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶80

0 4 FEB 2026

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S. Dharneesh Gold Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. M/S. Dharneesh Gold Private Limited

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

Sri Javvaji Suresh versus Bank of Baroda

M S Lmr Constructions versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Miss. Kota Karika

Ms Sri Lakshmi Enterprises Rep by its Prop Vema Rambabu versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S. Yuva Sree Diagnostics

Telangana Grameena Bank versus Sri Kolluri Adithya Sai