Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Manikanta Powrlooms Industry

DRT6 May 2026OA/183/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of loans availed by M/s. Manikanta Powerlooms Industry and Sri Kondi Ramu from the date of NPA, along with future interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Allowed the OA with costs; ordered respondents to pay Rs. 2,47,16,855.27 with future interest and to file a cost memo within two weeks; issued Recovery Certificate to proceed against hypothecated and

Canara Bank versus M/S. Manikanta Powrlooms Industry — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - !AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE O6th DAY OF MAY,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI cUMMADI cOPICHAND, PRESIDtNG OFFTCER

OA. No. 183 OF 2026

Between :

Canara Bank,

Hanumakonda - ll Branch, H.No. 2-5-39, Water Tank Road, Near Naveen Childrens Hospital, Nakkalgutta, Hanumakonda, Warangal - 506 001, Telangana State Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Manikanta Powerlooms lndustry, Represented by its Sole Proprietor,

¶10

Sri. Kondi Ramu

¶11

Plot No.245, Sy No. 179'1/1, Kakathiya Textile Park, Madikonda (V), Kazipet (M) Hanamkonda District, Telangana - 506 001

¶12

Sri. Kondi Ramu,

¶13

S/o. S kata Mallu,
Bu siness,
:"-
j *i'f'''ilffi;i"l arsa
W,-.---;P

¶14

Defendants

¶15

(oA. No. 183/2026)

¶16

Counsel for the parties :

¶17

For The Applicant Sri. A.V.S.S. Prasad For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 05.05.2026 Pronounced on 06.05.2026 Upload in website on 12.05 2026

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2,47,16,855.27 Ps. (Rupees Two Crores Forty Seven Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five and Paise Twenty Seven Only) i.e a sum of -

¶20

(i) Rs.1,87,90 ,932.45 Ps. under Term Loan account together with future interesl @13 40o/" p.a at monthly rests from 01.06.2025 till the date of realization;

¶21

(ii) Rs.20,17,292.97 Ps. under OD Loan account together with
rest @13.25% p.a at monthly rests from 01.06.2025 till
. *\l
12 fiAY '-.il
*o"._s//
Wi{#g

¶22

(oA. No. 183/2025)

¶23

(iii) Rs.4,15,628.42 Ps. under GECL - I account together with future interest @1 3.65% p.a at monthly rests from 01.06.2025 till the date of realization,

¶24

(iv) Rs.34,93,001.43 Ps. under GECL - 2 account together with future interest @13.65% p.a at monthly rests from 01.06.2025 till the date of realization;

¶25

and in default for sale of Hypothecated Movables and Mortgaged Property as mentioned in the Schedule of Property A and B to OA.

¶26

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant No. 1 is a Proprietorship Firm represented by its Sole Proprietor Defendant No. 2 availed Term Loan facility of Rs.98,31,0001 and working capital facility of Rs.15.00 Lakhs and executed Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 25.03.2019 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The defendants availed GECL-1 facility of Rs.5.00 Lakhs and executed Common Hypothecation Agreement dated 25.06.2020 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The defendants availed GECL- 2 loan facility of Rs.29.00 Lakhs and executed Take Delivery to DPN ed 09.11.2021 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in {#" Property A to the OA and executed Memorandum l,P of Title Deeds dated 13.12.2023 and deposited r z rlnr"rrnzsD"PT e qe,,

¶27

(OA. No. 183/2026)

¶28

Original Title Deed dated i7.02.2023 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 on 2g.10.2023 and issued Demand notice dated 03.01.2024 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Acl, 2002 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶29

¶30

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 05.05.2026.

¶31

¶32

Sri. B. Madhava Reddy, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW. 1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.26.

¶33

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶34

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?

¶35

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was gd and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to 6 brB?Ntw^{of the above,I hord that the Appticant Bankhas} f,P $taOtisA&t$neir^{claim made} in the OA against the Defendants 12 j (il i#Srr-,r

¶36

(OA. No. 183/2026)

¶37

and hence the Appricant Bank is entifled to recover the craim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶38

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

¶39

The Defendants No. i and 2 are joinfly and severaily riabre to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2,47,16,g55.27 ps. (Rupees Two crores Forty seven Lakhs sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five and paise Twenty Seven Only) i.e a sum of -

¶40

(i) Rs.1,87,90 ,932.45 Ps. under Term Loan account together with future interest @13.40% p.a from 01.06.2025 till the date of rea lization;

¶41

(ii) Rs.20,17,292.97 ps. under OD Loan account together with future interest @13.25% p.a from 01.06.2025 till the date of rea lization;

¶42

(iii) Rs.4,15,628.42 Ps. under GECL - I account together with future interest @13.65% p.a from 01.06.2025 tiil the date of rea lization;

¶43

(iv) Rs.34,93,001.43 Ps. under GECL - 2 account together with t @13.65% p.a from 01.06.2025 tiil the date of

¶44

.s
le

¶45

(OA. No. 183/202G)

¶46

The Applicant Bank is entiUed to proceed against the and Hypothecated Movables and Mortgaged property as mentioned in the Schedule of property A and B to the OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶47

10 The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of Defendants No. 2 and properties of Defendant No. 1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶48

That Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.

¶49

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

¶50

13 lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶51

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶52

(Dictated to the P A.. transcribed by her. corrected signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 06'h day otMay 2026)

¶53

(G. GOPICHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER
.€'"#

Canara Bank v. M/S. Manikanta Powrlooms Industry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Manikanta Powrlooms Industry

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Chehak Industries

Canara Bank versus Sri. Bathike Lalappa

Sri Rajkumar Margam and another versus Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd.

Sri Tangallapally Gnaneshwar versus Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus Ameya Industries

Indian Bank versus M/S. Avirbhava Infratech India Private Limited