Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Sri Navashakthi Automotives

DRT29 Jun 2026OA/26/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Originating Application, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's claim for recovery of a loan default amount from the borrower and guarantors, including interest and rights to proceed against mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.2,33,94,160.55 plus future interest; Applicant entitled to proceed against mortgaged properties and other assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Sri Navashakthi Automotives — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^TRIBUNAL -^{I AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 29th DAY^{OF JUNE,2026}

¶3

PRESENT: SR! GUMMADI^{GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER}

OA. No. 26 OF 2026

Between:

Bank of Baroda,

Mahabubnagar^{Main Branch,} Mahabubnagar^District, Telangana State.

¶8

Represented^{by its AuthorizedSignatory}

¶9

Applicant

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

M/s. Sri Navashakthi^Automotives, Represented^{bY its ProPrietor'} Mr. Pydikondala^{SrinivasaRao,}

¶12

Plot No. 11,^{SY.No. 1793,} Star City, APPannaPallY' Mahabubunagar,

¶13

Telangana -⁵⁰⁹⁰⁰¹

¶14

Mr. Pydikondala^{SrinivasaRao,} S/o. Venkata^SubhaRao' Aged Major,^{Sex Male,} Occ Business, R/o. Flat No.^12, Vanda ana r00 1.

¶15

29 JUN

¶16

¶17

(OA. No. 2612026)

¶18

Mrs. Pydikondala Tejaswi, Wo. Pydikondala Srinivasa Rao, Aged Major, Sex Female, Occ Business, R/o. Flat No. 12, Vandana Enclave, Venkateshwara Colony, Mahabubngar, Telangana - 509 001.

¶19

Mrs. Maddirala SatYavathi, Wo. Ramakrishna, Aged Major, Sex^Female, Occ Housewife, R/o. Flat No.^12, Vandana Enclave, Venkateshwara^ColonY, Mahabubngar, Telangana -^{509 001.}

¶20

Defendants

¶21

Counsel for^the Parties^:

¶22

For The APPlicant For the Defendant

¶23

M/s. Momin^{MohammedRafiq} Exparte 29.06.2026 29.06.2026 30.06.2026

2^{g Jut{2026}

(OA. No. 2612026)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2,33,94,160.55 Ps.^(Rupees Two Crores Thirty Three Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand One Hundred Sixty and Paise Fifty Five Only) together with future rate of interest @16.10%o^p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @2% p.a from the date of this application till the date of realization and in default for^sale of^Hypothecated Movables and Mortgaged Property as mentioned in^the Schedule of Property A to F^{to OA.}

¶28

As per the averments in the application,^{the Applicant Bank} states that Defendants No.1^{is a proprietorship firm represented} by its^proprietor Defendant^No. 2^{availed cash creditLoan} facility of Rs.2,00,00,0001 with^interest @11.25o/o^{p.a with} monthly rests and executed^{necessaryloan documentssuch} as Composite Hypothecation^{Agreement dated 31.01.2023'} Declaration cum undertaking^{cum Authority dated 31.01.2023in} favor of the Applicant^{Bank. The DefendantsNo. 2 to 4 stoodas} a Guarantor and executed^{General Form of Guaranteedated} 3 in favor of the Applicant^{Bank. The Defendants No. 3} equitable mortgaged^{morefully mentionedin} ule rty B to F to OA and executed^Memorandum

¶29

(oA. No. 2612026)

¶30

of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 07.02.2023 and deposited Original sale deed dated 20.07.2021, 12.10,2021, 12.10.2021, 07.08.2021 and 15.10.2022 in lavor 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 Demand Notice dated 25.02.2025 and possession notice dated 21.08.2025 under the SARFAESI Acl, 2002 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶31

¶32

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 29.06.2026.

¶33

¶34

Sri. Raja K., Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which^are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.21.

¶35

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^Bank.

¶36

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

¶37

ined exparte. To substantiate the case of^the W.'1, official of the Applicant Bank^was 7i-"frppiicffi^aaY '#Lrr.nin$ hibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1^to "no .1 A.2{^{tJljltiffiot tH} above, I hold that the Applicant^Bankhas .lir .:-1: -.tr ,, :, 4 \t',},-" "r:fu''/ ' .,.^-., ; :i rilj \ j j/

¶38

(oA. No.2612026)

¶39

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.

¶40

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

¶41

The Defendants No. 1 to 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2,33,94,160.55 Ps. (Rupees Two Crores Thirty Three Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand One Hundred Sixty and Paise Fifty Five Only) together with future rate of interest @16J0% p.a from the date of this application till the date of realization.

¶42

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the Hypothecated Movables and Mortgaged properties AS mentioned in the Schedule of the Property A to F to the OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶43

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of Defendants No. 2 to 4 and properties of Defendant No. 1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶44

Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶45

?\ 2I ;ul 2626 ;
,'r ..-.,-\ .r, L',\i,
^
t",-firt#'ly

¶46

(oA. No. 2612025)

¶47

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

¶48

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶49

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶50

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 29th day of Jun, 2026)

¶51

,,rt$*-:)
J z g "inn zozo
W,---#

¶52

sd/' (G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Sri Navashakthi Automotives

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Sri Navashakthi Automotives

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

Laxmi Venkataramana Constructions versus Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank)

Mrs Gada Uma Lavanya versus Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/S. Dsr Electricals

Rohit Enterprises and Others versus Icici Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sainath Poultry Feed Making Plant

V Raghavendra versus Union Bank of India