Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Ind Cotton Garments LLP

DRT1 Sept 2026OA/284/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by Indian Overseas Bank for recovery of Rs. 48,98,530.88 plus interest from a partnership firm and its guarantors. The bank substantiated its claim through documentary evidence after the defendants appeared ex parte.

What did the court decide?

The defendants were directed to pay Rs. 48,98,530.88 with future interest at 12.75% p.a. A recovery certificate is to be issued, and the bank is entitled to proceed against defendants' properties.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ind Cotton Garments LLP — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE OlSt DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI cUMMADI cOPtCHAND, PRES|DtNG OFFTCER

¶3

OA. No. 284 OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

lndian Overseas Bank, Maredpally Branch, Secunderabad - 500 026, Telangana Represented by its Chief Manger

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s. lnd Cotton Garments, LLP, Regd. Office: at Flat No.401, Block 'F', Nagarjuna Residency, Gachibowli, Serilingampally, Hyderabad-500 032,T.S.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

2nd floor, Building No.5-9-266, RG Nagar Industrrial Estate, Prasanth Nagar, Kukatpally, Medchal-Malkajgiri Dist., Hyderabad - 500072, T.S.

¶11

Sri Sreedhan Namburi s/o Sri Namburi Subba Naidu, Flat No.401, F Block, NCC Urban, Nagarjuna Residency, ;'-: 'ri Opp: NASR School, Gachibowli, K.V. Rangareddy, T.S. - 500 032.

¶12

(oA. No.284/2026)

¶13

3. Sri MahonarKunchala s/oSri KunchalaPichaiah, MIG886, RoadNo.3,
KPHBColony, Near-TempleBusStop, Kukatpally,
Hyderabad, T.S.500 072. Defendants
Counsel forthe^parties:
For TheApplicant Mr.V. Sethu MadhavaRao
Forthe Defendants no.1and2 Exparte
FortheDefendantsno.3 Sri.ArunnMarripeddi
Reservedon 24.08.2026
Pronouncedon 01.09.2026
Uploadinwebsiteon 01.09.2026

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.48,98,530.88 Ps.^(Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Five Hundred^and Thirty Only) with future rate of interest @12.75Yo^{p.a with} the date of this application till the date of for sale of Hypothecated Movables as of Property to OA.

¶16

(OA. No. 28412026)

¶17

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant no. 1 is a partnership firm represented by its partners Defendants no. 2 and 3 availed cash credit loan facility of Rs.50,00,0001 with interest and executed necessary loan documents such as Letter of Hypothecation dated 03.12.2024 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendants no. 2 and 3 stood as a Guarantor in the loan facilities availed by the Defendant no. 1 and executed Letter of Guarantee dated 03.12.2018 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 14.02.2026 to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶18

Sri. Arunn Marripeddi filed Vakalat on behalf of Defendant No. 3. No representation from Defendant No. 3 side and WS of Defendant No. 3 not filed and hence Defendant No. 3 called absent and set exparte on 24.08.2026. Defendants No. 1 and 2 called absent and set exparte on 29.06.2026.

¶19

¶20

the Applicant Bank relevant documents,

OiSEP

(OA. No. 28412026)

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.1 to A.10. 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. 1 to 3 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.48,98,530.88 Ps. (Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Five Hundred and Thifi Only) with future rate of interest @12.750^{p.a from the date of this applicationtill the date of} realization.

¶28

..'.....\q

¶29

The nppfitam. pqni'i"l{;entitt"o to proceed against the ...(\ '0r., Hypotheiated Movables as m6ntioned in the Schedule of Property .,,Y ':i 1i to the oAJowtt {.etti*gon qlthe debt due.

¶30

'. ). 4

¶31

(OA. No. 28412026)

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the^parties concerned.

¶37

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her corrected, signed and^pronounced by me in the open court on this the 01"r day of Sep, 2026)

¶38

sd/(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

*
[ 1 stp ?ur
,.i

Indian Overseas Bank v. Ind Cotton Garments LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Ind Cotton Garments LLP

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sirvi Marketing

South Indian Bank versus Ms. Mamidala Kavitha

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Mrs. Jayasudha Routhu

State Bank of India versus Mrs.Chapa Ramana

S Charishma versus Hdfc Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus Abhinav Industries