Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. D.G. Enterprises

DRT3 Jul 2026OA/188/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Karur Vysya Bank Ltd against three defendants for recovery of a loan amounting to Rs. 1.20 crore with future interest and costs, following the defendants' absenteeism.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,20,23,939.51 with future interest; Applicant Bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and to issue Recovery Certificate.

Karur Vysya Bank versus D.G. Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE O3Td DAY OF JULY,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFTCER

¶3

OA. No. 188 OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

Karur Vysya Bank Ltd, Assets Recovery Branch D.No.5-8-356 to 362, 3rd Floor Chirag Ali Lane Abids, Hyderabad-500001 Represented by its Chief Manager

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

D G Enterprises Rep by its Proprietor Jayesh R Shah Rlo. 12-775, Upstairs Pandit Nehru Road, Adoni,

¶9

Andhra Pradesh-518301

¶10

Jayesh R Shah S/o, Rasiklal Dharamchand Shah Age: 30 Years; Occ: Business Rio. 15/386-1C Viktoriya Street Adoni, Andhra Pradesh-518301

¶11

(oA. No. 188/2026)

¶12

3. Rasiklal Dharamchand^Shah
S/o. Dharamchand
Age:58Years; Occ:^Business, R/o. 15i386-1C
ViktoriyaStreet Adoni, AndhraPradesh-518301	Defendants
Counsel fortheParties^:
For TheApplicant	Lotus LawAssociates
FortheDefendant	Exparte
Reservedon	01.07.2026
Pronouncedon	03.07.2026
Uploadinwebsite^on	03.07.2026

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed^{the present OA against Defendantfor} recovery of a total^sum of^{Rs. 1,20,23,939.51Ps. (RupeesOne} Crores Twenty Lakhs^{Twenty Three ThousandNine} Hundred Thirty Nine^{and Paise Fifty One Only)i.e a sum of} -

¶15

.,;'
6
/,p
;i.r * 0

¶16

1,04,98,290.07. Ps. with^{future rateofinterest} p.a with monthly rests from^the date of this till the date of^realization

¶17

(oA. No. 188/2026)

¶18

(ii) Rs.15,25,640.44. Ps. with future rate of interest @8.2Oo/" p.a with monthly rests from the date of thls application till the date of realization

¶19

and in default for sale of Mortgaged Property as mentioned in the Schedule of Property to OA.

¶20

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant no. 1 is a proprietorship firm represented by its Proprietor Defendant No. 2 availed loan facility of Rs.60,00,000/- with interest @11.00o/o p.a and executed necessary documents such as Hypothecation Agreement for cash crediU overdraft dated 12.11.2019 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant No. 2 and 3 stood as a Guarantor and executed Guarantee Agreement dated 12.11.2019 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants availed GECL loan facility of Rs.12,00,000/- with interest @8.20% p.a and executed necessary documents such as Creduit facility Agreement dated 25.08.2020 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in Schedule of property to OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 12.11.2019 and deposited Sale deed dated 29.05.1980 in the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan faci failed to comply the terms of sa nctio n, nk classified the account as NPA dated 17.05.2022 to the '"8'30^g'.t"#

¶21

(OA. No. 188/2026)

¶22

defendants.^{lnspite of severalrequests and demands'the} defendants^{did not clear the outstanding'Hence this OA'}

¶23

Defendants^{called absent and set exparte on 01 07 2026'}

¶24

4 Sri. N. Venkata^{Sesha Giridhar, Manager of the ApplicantBank} examined himself^{as AW.1 and exhibited relevantdocuments'} which are^{marked as Ex.A.1 to A.20'}

¶25

Heard the Ld.^{Counsel for the ApplicantBank'}

¶26

The point that^{arise for considerationis whetherthe Applicant} bankisentitledfortheclaimmadeintheoAagainstthe Defendants^as PraYed^for?

¶27

Defendants^{remained exparte To substantiate the case of the} Applicant Bank,^AW.1 ,^{official of the ApplicantBank was} examined and^{he exhibited relevant documents as Ex A'1 to} A.20. ln view^{of the above,I hold that the ApplicantBank has} established their^{claim made in the OA against the Defendants} andhencetheApplicantBankisentitledtorecovertheclaim OA with future^{interestand costs.}

0 3 .r4 2n25

(oA. No. 188/2026)

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

¶32

The Defendants No. 1 to 3 are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs. 1,20,23,939.51 ps. (Rupees One Crores Twenty Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thifi Nine and Paise Fifty One Only) i.e a sum of -

¶33

(i) Rs.1,04,98,299.07. Ps. with future rate of interest @11.00%^{p.a from the date} of this apptication tiil the date of realization

¶34

(ii) Rs.15,25,540.44. Ps. with future rate of interest @B.2Oyo p.a from the date of this application till the date of rea lization

¶35

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.

¶36

¶37

is entitled to proceed against the person Defendant No. 2 and 3 and properties of towards realization of the debt due.

¶38

{,f
:0
..f-S'
,4'
.€rhr;.,*-.ff.1-Oq'
\air76pY't-r:'

¶39

(oA. No. 188/2026)

¶40

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

¶41

The Applicant^{shall file a costmemowithin two weeks from the} date of receipt^{of order.}

¶42

13 lssue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly}

¶43

14 Communicate^{a copy of the order to the partiesconcerned'}

¶44

(Dictated to the P A. transcribed^{by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open courton} this the O3'd^{daYof Jul2026)}

¶45

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶46

fu^r"

Karur Vysya Bank v. D.G. Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. D.G. Enterprises

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

Canara Bank versus M/S. Nandini Powerloom Industry

Indian Bank versus M/S. Auroflow Infra Realty Pvt. Ltd.

Gutha Amith Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

Bank of Baroda versus Thadakamalla Nagamani

State Bank of India versus S.R. Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus Ushasri Cotton Ginning Mills Private Limited