Allowed

Indian Bank v. Ms Smh Constructions

DRT8 Sept 2026OA/385/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application under the Recovery Tribunal, the Bank claimed recovery of loan amounts for cash credit and vehicle loans. The Tribunal allowed the application, holding the bank established its claim via examined witnesses and documents.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 29,27,674.00 with future interest; Applicant entitled to realize via hypothecated property and issue Recovery Certificate.

Indian Bank versus Ms Smh Constructions — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE OTth DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2026 PRESENT; SRI cUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFTCER

¶2

OA. No.385 OF 2026

¶3

Between :

¶4

lndian Bank, Tollychowki Branch, Door No. 8120111A, Suryanagar Colony, 7 Toombs Road, Tollychowki, Golconda Post, Hyderabad - 500008, Telangana Represented by its Branch Manager Applicant VERSUS 1. M/S. SMH Constructions Proprietorship Concern Represented by its Proprietor Smt. Amber Begum Wife of Mr. Syed Hussain. H.No.9-1 0-2111 7/A, Golconda, Hyderabad. Pin Code: 500008. Telangana State. E-mail: [email protected] Mobile No. 6305752341 and Mobile No. 9392962178 a 8 sEP 20?6

¶5

(OA. No. 38s/2026)

¶6

Smt. Amber Begum Wife of Mr. Syed Hussain. H. No.9-1 0-21 /1 7/A, Golconda, Hyderabad. Pin Code: 500008. Telangana State. E-mail: [email protected] Mobile No. 6305752341 and Mobile No. 9392962178 Defendants

¶7

Counsel for the^{parties :} For The Applicant B. Sivakumar For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 02.09.2026 Pronounced on 07.09.2026 Upload in website on 08.09.2026

¶8

ORDER

¶9

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA against Defendants^for of a total sum of Rs.29,27,674.00. Ps^(Rupees Twenty Twenty Seven Thousand Six Hundred and !y) i.e a sum of - i,J^{o s sEP,ooo}

¶10

(oA. No. 385/2026)

¶11

(i)

¶12

Rs.19,40,732.59 Ps. under the Open cash credit loan account with future rate of interest @11.85% p.a plus @2% penal interest with monthly rests from 01 .06.2026 till the date of realization,

¶13

( ii)

¶14

Rs.9,86,940.99 Ps. under the MSME - Vehicle Loan scheme Car loan account with future rate of interest @8.80o/o^{p.a plus} @2o/o^{penal interest} with monthly rests from 0'1.06.2026 till the date of realization,

¶15

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

¶16

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 Open credit loan facility of Rs.16,86,0001 with interest and executed Agreement for Open cash credit loan Agreement dated 06.12.2023 and Vehicle Loan of Rs. 10,00,0004 with interest and executed Agreement of Hypothecation of vehicles dated 06.07.2024 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant no. 2 stood as a guarantor in the loan facilities availed by the Defendants and executed Guarantee Agreement dated 06.07.2024 in favor of the Applicant Bank..-T$g.,,,.Defendants hypothecated movables moref.gfly mentioned^iilh" Schedute of the property to OA .:.j'' :l \ "n'|q'th8^{lE'F:rr'",ilH'Il"tbv the Derendants After availing}

¶17

,..':;',.4 t.:;::,;!
'i---t',, ,.. . .,.:f .. . !
t'-'._ \d': -- :. .j ' .
i"'t/
'-: ''' n - ,'.
.,,- ,.,.::.; 'l

¶18

(OA. No. 385/2026)

¶19

the loan facility, the defendants failed to comply the terms^of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the^accountas NPA on 16.07.2025 and issued Demand^{Notice dated 06.03.2026} to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and^demands,the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this^OA.

¶20

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 02.09.2026.

¶21

Sri. Pranav Kant Tiwari, Branch Manager of the Applicant^Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 lo 4.22.

¶22

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶23

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?

¶24

Defendants remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.'l , official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.22. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established I th eir,clqiry:.1 eir made in the OA against the Defendants .- . * . -,:.and hence.lll€lAgpliqedtlpank is entitled to recover the claim !:-i made in"the O futu and costs.

¶25

¶26

(OA. No. 38s/2026)

¶27

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

¶28

The Defendants No. 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs. 29,27,674.00. ps (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Seventy Four Only) i.e a sum of -

¶29

(i) Rs.19,40,732.59 Ps. under the Open cash credit loan account with future rate of interest @11.BSo/o p.a from 01.06.2026 till the date of realization,

¶30

( ii) Rs.9,86,940.99 Ps. under the MSME - Vehicle Loan scheme Car loan account with future rate of interest @8.80%^{p.a from 01.06.2026} tiil the date of reatization.

¶31

The Applicant Bank is entiiled to proceed against the Hypothecated Movables and Vehicle as mentioned in the schedule of Property to the OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶32

The Applicant Bank ':." is entifled to proceed against the person and properties..of .Qgf${ant No. 2 and properties of Defendant no. 1 '., '.,.<sup>.'</sup> firrg towardi ieatizlibhrof the debt due. . --.,r^,s\t r,,, B s si.c ?oz$ .]i . *- lt *.1, il -;.. fii!4 s '. l.;'. . ,... ',1:' .-.i_- ;., -_. , -...r/-../^" ...d..' Y

¶33

(OA. No. 38s/2026)

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

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

¶38

(Dictated to the P.A. transcribed by her, corrected,^{signed and pronounced by me ln the open court on} this the 07th day of SeP,²⁰²⁶⁾

¶39

sd/(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶40

TRUE GCIPY
t
K.a"a"o!\19
6Rr-t, rvnt:o'

Indian Bank v. Ms Smh Constructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Ms Smh Constructions

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

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank versus Ritish Rao Regulapati

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Srinivasulu Reddy

Mrs Uma Vani Indukuri versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mohd.Manzoor Ahmed

State Bank of India versus Khaja Ladies Tailors and Cloth Center

Hdfc Bank versus Baljeguden Mohan