Allowed

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Sri Rayolu Naveen Kumar

DRT8 Apr 2026OA/146/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by a bank for recovery of an outstanding loan of Rs. 32,41,056.40 along with future interest and proceeded against mortgaged property and personal assets of the joint borrowers.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally directed to pay Rs. 32,41,056.40 with interest; Applicant entitled to proceed against mortgaged and personal property; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Sri Rayolu Naveen Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE OSth DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PREStDING OFFTCER

¶3

OA. No. 146 OF 2026

¶4

Between:

¶5

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. Premises No. 21-1-525 to 527, Ground Floor, Opp Lane to High Court Gate No.4, Rikabgunj, Hyderabad - 500 OO2 Represented by its Authorized Officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Sri. Rayolu Naveen Kumar,

¶9

S/o. Rayolu Naga Raju, Aged 35 years, Occ. Government Employee, Rlo. 110121, Rajeev Gruhakalpa Colony, Ahmedguda, Keesara Cherial, Medchal Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District,

¶10

Telangana - 501 301.

¶11

Smt. Rayolu Lalitha,

¶12

Wo. Rayolu Naga Raju,

¶13

Aged 56 years. Occ. Self Employee

¶14

Rlo. 1 10121, Rajeev Gruhakalpa Colony,

¶15

Ahmedguda, Keesara Cherial,
Medchal Malkajgiri, ...2,t . . _ ,
Ranga Reddy District,'..-'.ia';.;:,,'ji?:*
""tt,tj.
Telangana - 501 301 : ii, )St :....J }r: , .:. Defendants
], oBnpn0f .i t i
:,.,
t .. ,'t'-t'i
.i
q, -,,1,.. "- - '" -'tF9' '"{ l_,' ''' ' . '
,.:i= -1--
":;,,

¶16

(oA. No. 14612025)

¶17

Counsel for the parties :

¶18

For The Applicant Smt. G. Rama Manoja For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 01.04.2026 Pronounced on 08.04.2026 Upload in website on 08.04.2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.32,41,056.40 ps. (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Fofi One Thousand Fifty Six and paise Forty Only) with future interest @^g.3S% p.a with monthty rests from 31 .12.2025 statement date to the date of Award/decree thereafter @18%p.a compounded with monthly rests tillthe date of realization and in default for sale of Mortgaged property as mentioned in the Schedule of Property to OA.

¶21

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendants No. 1 and 2 availed Home Loan of Rs.40,00,0001 repayable in 246 monthly installments with interest @9.35% p.a with monthly rests and executed Articles of '..,,,'.'..]. Agreement Deferidant '?i6. z c$batec Equitable Mortgage morefully Bgtpn?m^'t,,

¶22

(oA. No. 146/2026)

¶23

mentioned in Schedule of Property to the OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title deeds dated 06.07.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank and Defendant no. 2 deposited Sale Deed in favor of the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA 17.11.2024 and issued Demand Notice dated 03.12.2024 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to the defendants. The Applicant Bank initiated SARFAESI proceeded and issued notices to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶24

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 06.04.2026.

¶25

Mr. M. Raj Kumar, Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.51.

¶26

Heard the Ld. Counsel for lhe Applicant Bank.

¶27

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

¶28

To substantiate the case of the of the Applicant Bank was

¶29

O APR 2M

¶30

(OA. No. 14612026')

¶31

examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.51. 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 entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶32

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

¶33

The Defendants No. 1 and 2 are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.32,41,056.40 Ps. (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Forty One Thousand Fifty Six and Paise Forty Only) with future interest @ 9.35%^{p.a from} 31.12.2025 till the date of realization.

¶34

The Applicant Bank is entitled to^proceed against the^Mortgaged Property as mentioned in the Schedule of Property to the^OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶35

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^{proceed againstthe person} and properties of defendants No. 1 and 2^{towards realization of} the debt due.

¶36

That Applicant Bank is entitled to the costs^{of the OA.}

¶37

"rmb * oonpnaffi

¶38

(oA. No. L46l2o26l

¶39

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

¶40

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶42

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 08th day of Apr, 2026)

¶43

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND)

¶44

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶45

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Sri Rayolu Naveen Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Sri Rayolu Naveen Kumar

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

Ujwal Agarwal versus Canara Bank

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Raghavendra Guptha Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus M/S. Salasar Ispat Udyog

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus M/S. Vedamsa Agro Products Pvt. Ltd.

Indira Poultry Farm versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/S. Pushpa Projects