Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/s Ayyappa Water Plant

DRT9 Sept 2026OA/205/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

That the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Indian Bank against defendants for recovery of a term loan facility. The bank established its claim through documentation and the tribunal ordered joint and several recovery along with a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.1,08,79,310.44 with future interest at 10% p.a. A recovery certificate is issued.

Indian Bank versus M/s Ayyappa Water Plant — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE Ogth DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2026 PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

OA. No. 205 OF 2026

¶3

Between :

¶4

lndian Bank, Mahabubabad Branch, 6-3, 99i4, Nehru Street, Mahabubabad Dist, Telangana - 506101 Represented by its Branch Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/s. Ayyappa Water Plant H.No. 10-29/6/4, 9th Ward, Bagath Nagar Thorrur, Mahabubabad - 506101

¶8

Smt. Banoth Swaroopa D/o Lalsingh H.No. 10-29/6iA, 9th Ward, Bagath Nagar Thorrur, Mahabubabad - 50610'l

¶9

Also At

¶10

D.No. 3-13, Venky Thanda Annaram, Kesamudram, Mahabubabad Dist. Telangana - 506101

¶11

0 g srP 2C26

¶12

(oA. No, 20sl2026)

¶13

Sri. Kusnoth Sudhakar, S/o. Babu, D.No. 3-16, Venky Thanda, Annaram, Kesamudram, Mahabubabad Dist. Telangana - 506'1 01 Also At H.No. 1 0-2916/A, 9th Ward, Bagath Nagar Thorrur, Mahabubabad - 506101

¶14

Defendants

¶15

Counsel for the parties : For The Applicant Hemanth Kumar Vemuri For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 08.09.2026 Pronounced on 09.09.2026 Upload in website on 09.09.2026

¶16

ORDER

¶17

filed the present OA against Defendants for of Rs.1,08,79,310.44. Ps. ( Rupees One Seventy Nine Thousand and Three Paise Forty Four Only) with future rate g g t-:oflintere$ p.a with monthly rests along with penal

¶18

(OA. No. 20sl2026)

¶19

interest @2% p.a from 09.09.2025 till the date of realization 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 Term loan facility of Rs.98,00,000/- repayable in 84 equated monthly installments of Rs.1,16,667/- p.m with interest @8.50% p.a and executed Agreement of Hypothecation of Movables dated 30.03.2023 and Term Loan Agreement dated 30.03.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant no. 3 stood as a Guarantor in the loan facilities availed by the Defendants and executed Guarantee Agreement dated 30.03.2023 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 30.03.2023 and deposited Registered 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 and issued Legal Notice dated 09.01 .2026 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did--not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA. -'' .'^]''' .^, - '.^.,.' . .,, .., ..... 3. Eefgndants called absent and set exparte on 08.09.2026 $^{$ r:': -i':}

¶21

(OA. No. 20sl2026)

¶22

Sri. Banothu Amarendar, Assistant Manager of the Applicant^Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.9.

¶23

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶24

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?

¶25

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.'l to} A.9. 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.

¶26

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

¶27

The Defendants no.^'l to 3 are^jointly and severally^{liable to pay} to the App g-total sum of Rs.1,08,79,310.44.^{Ps. (} Eghl Paise Forty Four Only) with o[,!,tii,,@lo a from 09.09.2025 till the date

¶28

(oA. No. 20sl2026)

¶29

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

¶30

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of Defendants no. 2 and 3 and properties of Defendant no. 1 Firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶35

(Dictated to the P A., transcribed by her corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 09th day of Sep , 2026)

¶36

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Bank v. M/s Ayyappa Water Plant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/s Ayyappa Water Plant

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

Union Bank of India versus Vijay Kumar

City Union Bank Limited versus Vijaya Lakshmi

Bugga Naveen versus Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Canara Bank versus Mr. Ramavath Laxma and others

Piske Manohar versus Sreenivasa Padmavathico Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Mohan Abbugari versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.