Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S. Auroflow Infra Realty Pvt. Ltd.

DRT2 Jul 2026OA/478/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Ordinance Application (OA) before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the bank sought recovery of dues with interest and sale of mortgaged properties. The Tribunal held the bank established its claim and allowed the application against all defendants, who are jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants held jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,21,77,550/- with future interest; entitlement to proceed against properties confirmed; Recovery Certificate issued.

Indian Bank versus M/S. Auroflow Infra Realty Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - IAT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE O2Nd DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

OA. No.478OF2025

Between :

lndian Bank,

Barkatpura Branch, No.3-4499, & 3-4-7 64 Barkatpura, Hyderabad 500 027

¶7

Represented by its Authorized Signatory

¶8

Applicant

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

M/s.Auroflow lnfra Realty Pvt.Ltd, Flat No.78, Marigold L and T, Serene County, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500 032.

¶11

Also at:

¶12

Flat No.128, Marigold L and T, Serene County Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500 032..

¶13

Mr.Murali Krishna Kocharla^Kota S/o Mr. Venkatarayudu^{Kocharla Kota,} Major,

¶14

R/o Flat No.78, Marigold Serene County Telecom^Nagar, Near Urdu University,

¶15

(oA. No. 4781202s)

¶16

Gachibowli Hyderabad 500 032.

¶17

Also at:

¶18

Flat No.128, Marigold L and T, Serene County Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500 032..

¶19

Mrs. K.Madhuri Husband name not known to applicant Major, R/o Flat No.78, Marigold Serene County Telecom Nagar, Near Urdu University, Gachibowli Hyderabad 500 032

¶20

Also at:

¶21

Flat No.128, Marigold L and T, Serene County Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500 032..

¶22

Mr.K.Srinivasa Rao Father name not known to aPPlicant Major, R/o 8, Mega TownshiP, Ayyappa Nagar Vijayawada 520 0O7

¶23

Also at:

¶24

H.No. 74-14-19 Digital Door No.VMC-ATB2ASGI, Block No.10, Revenue Ward^No.10, RTC Colony Yanamalakuduru^Lakulu

¶25

-4".. "
;j, s
ffi
ES

¶26

(OA. No. 4781202s)

¶27

Road in Sy.No.199/2 & 199/2A, Patamata, Vijayawada 520 007

¶28

Mrs.Koneru Kasi Ratnam Wo Mr. Radhakarishna Muthy, Major, R/o No.24-64, West lbrahimpatnam, Vijayawada 521456.

¶29

Also at:

¶30

H.No.74-14-19 Digital Door No. VMC-ATB2ASGI, Block No.10, Revenue Ward No.10, RTC Colony Yanamalakuduru Lakulu Road in Sy.No.199/2 & 199/24, Patamata, Vijayawada 52O O07

¶31

Defendants

¶32

Counsel for the^parties:

¶33

For The ApplicantThe ApplicantApplicant R.V. Subba Rao For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 30.06.2026 Pronounced on 02.07.2026 Upload in website on 02.07.2026

¶34

For The ApplicantThe ApplicantApplicant

(OA. No. 47812025)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs. 1,21 ,77,550/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty One Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Only) with future interest @'16.9% p.a with quaterly rests 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 and B to OA.

¶40

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant No. 1 is a Private limited company represented by its Directors Defendants no. 2, 3 and 4 availed OCC facility of Rs.25.00 Lakhs , Bank guarantee Facility of Rs.95.00 Lakhs and Vehicle loan of Rs.7.80 Lakhs with interest and executed Agreement for Hypothecation of Movables daled 14.07.2017 Agreement of pen Cash credit dated 4.07.2017 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The defendants no. 2 to 5 stood as a Guarantor and executed Agreement of Guarantee dated 14.07.2017 in favor of the Applicant Bank. The Defendant created Equitable Mortgage morefully mentioned in Schedule of property to OA and executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 17.07.2017 in favor of the Applicant Bank and deposited Sale deeds in licant Bank. After availing the loan to comply the terms of sanction, ,l!u ln.li t f"9

¶41

(OA. No. 4781202s)

¶42

hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 27.06.2019 and issued Demand notice dated 07.10.2019 under Section 13(2) ol the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to the defendants. The applicant bank initiated SARFAESI proceeding and sent notices to the defendants. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶43

Sri. D. Raghavulu filed Vakalat on behalf of Defendant No. 4 and 5 . Even after the lapse of 45 Days WS of Defendant No. 4 and 5 not filed and hence the right of filing of WS of Defendant No. 4 and 5 was forfeited on 05.05.2026. Defendants No. 1 to 3 called absent and set exparte on^'10.03.2026.

¶44

Smt. Sangeetha J., Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to 4.21.

¶45

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶46

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?

¶47

5 did not file his WS even after availing the right of filing of WS of Defendant . Defendants No. 1 to 3 called absent / '- "an'i"set^exii*teTo ntiate the case of the Applicant Bank, ,,, lr {r Bl'r;l 263g 5

¶48

(OA. No. 4781202s)

¶49

AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.21. 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.

¶50

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

¶51

The Defendants no. 1 to 5 are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs. 1,21,77,550/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty One Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Only) with future interest @16.9%^p.a from the date of this application till the date of realization.

¶52

¶53

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

¶54

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to^proceed against the properties of Defendant No. 1 firm and person and^properties of Defendant no. 2 to 5 towards realization of the^{debt due.}

¶55

(OA. No. 478/202s)

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶59

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶60

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 02"d day ofJul, 2026)

¶61

sd/-

¶62

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶63

/vb

Indian Bank v. M/S. Auroflow Infra Realty Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S. Auroflow Infra Realty Pvt. Ltd.

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

Gutha Amith Kumar versus Bank of Baroda

State Bank of India versus Akkinapalli Ravi

State Bank of India versus M/S.Happy Travels

Canara Bank versus M/S. Nandini Powerloom Industry

Bank of Baroda versus Thadakamalla Nagamani

State Bank of India versus S.R. Enterprises