Allowed

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Tanvika Enterprises

DRT17 Aug 2026OA/410/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Appeal filed by the Bank for recovery of dues arising from a term loan default. The court observed the defendant's absence and the absence of any defense against the allegations.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 21,39,981 with future interest at 10% p.a. Recovery certificate issued.

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Tanvika Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL^{_ IAT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF^AUGUST,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI^{GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER}

¶3

OA. No. 410 OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank^Limited, Mahedipatnam Branch, 1 3-6-436/A/33, Laxmi^APartment, Lakshmi Nagar, MehdiPatnam, Pillar No: 67, Hyderabad^- 500028, Telangana State Represented by its Authorized^Officer

¶6

Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

M/s Tanvika Enterprises Rep. by its^proprietor

¶9

Mr. Badamoni Ramu^Goud

¶10

1 0-1 -1 161 I¹ 7, West MaredPallY,

¶11

Secunderabad,

¶12

Telangana - 500026

¶13

Mr. Badamoni^{Ramu Goud} S/o Sataiah Goud 1 O-1 -1 161 11 7, West^MaredPallY, New Lions Club, Secunderabad Telangana - 500026 6"w% "q^{llAaDwS *} &**-q#

¶14

(oA. No. 410/2026)

¶15

3. Mrs.Vaguludas^Sreevani WoMr.Badamoni^{Ramu Goud} 1O-1-1161117,West^MaredPallY' New Lions Club, Secunderabad
Telangana-500026
Counsel fortheParties^:
For TheAPP	icant
Forthe Defendant	Exparte
Reservedon	14.08.2026
Pronouncedon	17.08.2026
Uploadinwebsite^on	17.08.2026

¶16

Defendants

¶17

ORDER

¶18

l.TheApplicantBankfiledthepresentoAagainstDefendants for recovery of a^{total sum of Rs'21,39,981} '00'^{Ps' (Rupees} Twenty One Lakhs^{Thirty Nine ThousandNine Hundredand} Eighty One Paise^{Only) with future rate of interest} monthly rests from^{the date of filing of this}

¶19

@1O.00% P^a.t apptieation-titt'tgi^{q,ate of reallzation and in defaultfor sale of} Mortgage{ProrJ,tg"i.^{mentionedto oA.} 7 AUD ?ofr^I

¶20

lt,'L ,-, lt 2

¶21

'tt&p"t#^.^rJli \Sprp.l"t9

¶22

(OA. No. 410/2026)

¶23

As^per the^{avermentsin the application,the ApplicantBank states} that Defendant^{no. 1 is a ProprietorshipFirm representedby its} Proprietor^{DefendantNo 2 availed Term Loan facility of} Rs.27,00,000/-^{repayable in 84 equated monthlyinstallments} together with^interest @|O.|OYo^{p'a with monthly restsand} executed necessary^{loan documents such as CC Hypothecation} Agreement^{dated 18.02.2021,Articles of Agreementdated} 18.02.2021^{in favor of the Applicant Bank' The Defendant no' 3} stood as a^{Guarantor in the loan facilities availedby the} Defendant^{No. 1 and executed Guaranteecovering Letterdated} 18.02.2021from^{the Applicant Bank' The Defendants created} Equitable Mortgage^{morefully mentioned to oA and executed} Memorandum^{of Depositof Title Deedsdated18'02'2021and} deposited^{RegisteredSale Deed in favor of the Applicant Bank'} After availing^{the loan facility'the defendantsfailed to comply} the terms^{of sanction,hencethe applicant bankclassifiedthe} account as^{NPA on 16.02.2024 and issued DemandNotice} dated 26.02.2024^{under Section 13(2) underof the SARFAESI} Act, 2002^{and Legal notice dated 12'08'2025 to the defendants'} lnspite of^{several requestsand demands'the defendantsdid not} clear the^{outstanding.Hence this OA'}

¶24

Defendants^{called absent and set exparteon 14'08'2026'}

¶25

ran, Branch^{Managerofthe ApPlicant Bank} AW.1 and^exhibited relevant documents, marked Ex.A.1 to^A.35.

¶26

(oA. No. 410/2026)

¶27

Heard the^{Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank'}

¶28

is whether the^APPlicant 6. The point that^{arise for consideration} in the OA against^the bank is entitled^{for the claim made} Defendants^as PraYed^for?

¶29

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.35.lnviewoftheabove,lholdthattheApplicantBankhas established^{their claim made in the oA against the Defendants} and hence^{the Applicant Bank is entitledto recover the claim} made in^{the OA with futureinterest and costs'}

¶30

¶31

ln the result,^{the present OA is allowedwith costs' as under:}

¶32

The Defendants^{no' 1 to 3 are jointlyand severallyliable to pay} to the Applicant^{Bank a total sum of Rs'21'39'981'00'Ps'} (Rupees Twenty^{One Lakhs Thirty Nine ThousandNine} Hundred^{and Eighty One Paise Only) with future rate of} interest @10.00%^{p.a from the date of filing of this applicationtill} the date^{of realization.}

¶33

The Bank is^{entitled to} Proceed against^{the Mortgaged} realization^{of the debt} to the OA^towards il 'i'i,i^{llNt1ttg *} t

¶34

(oA. No. 410/2026)

¶35

also entitled^{to proceed againstthe person}

¶36

1. The Applicant^{Bank is} Defendants no.^{2 and 3 and properties of}

¶37

and proPerties^of Defendant^{No. 1 firm} towards realization^{of the debt due'}

¶38

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

¶39

a cost memo^{within two weeks from the}

¶40

1. The ApPlicant^{shall file} date of^{receiPt of order.}

¶41

lssue Recovery^{Certificate accordingly'}

¶42

Communicate^{a copy of the order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the^{P.A., transcribed by her, corrected' signed and pronounced by me in the open court on} this the^{17thday of Aug, 2026)}

¶43

sdr(G. GOPICHAND) PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶44

4-,-r"', ,{''f'"*tr^9'Y

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Tanvika Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited v. Tanvika 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

State Bank of India versus Sri Aelimi Santhosh

T.Madhava Rao High Power Crushers Private Limited and Others versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/S.Bhadra Natural Fruits Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Sreerama Lakhsmi

M/S. Uday Enterprises versus Unity Small Finance Bank Limited

Mrs Muneeza Khanam versus Karnataka Bank Limited