Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Kisan Agri Shop

DRT6 Apr 2026OA/502/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Open Arbitration Application filed by Canara Bank to recover a debt of Rs. 44.08 lakhs along with future interest and costs from the Defendant, who had failed to comply with loan terms under the CGTMSE scheme.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the Defendant to pay Rs. 44,08,129.09 including future interest and costs. Authorized recovery from hypothecated movables and Defendant's properties.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Kisan Agri Shop — Consumer Protection | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.5O2 ot 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

Canara Bank, Nalgonda VT colony branch, Hyderabad Road, Nalgonda, Represented by its Principal Officer And Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Kisan Agri Shop, Represented by its Prop. Bikkumalla Kedareeshwar, #09, vegetable market, Prakasam bazar, Nalgonda, Telangana - 508 01 Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Parties: For the Applicant Smt N. Indira Defendant Sri S. Ravi Reserved on 30.03.2026 Pronounced on 06.04.2026 Uploaded in website on 06.04.2026

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The Applicant Defendant for recovery ofa tota I Forty Four Lakhs Eight Nine and paise nine only)

¶13

Eight

¶14

(oA.No.s02l202s)

¶15

with future interest @ 11.75olo p.a with monthly rests along with penal interest @ 2olo from date of filing of OA till the date of realization and in default for sale of hypothecated movables in the schedule to OA;

¶16

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant availed cash credit of Rs.40.00 lakhs under CGTMSE scheme on 31.10.2023. The defendant hypothecated the book debts and stocks in favour of Applicant bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA and issued legal notice dated 13.10.2025. Inspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶17

Counsel for defendant filed vakalath but failed to file Written statement.

¶18

Sri T. Nikhil, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1to A.8.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶20

is whether the Applicant Bank is against the Defendant as prayed

¶21

(oA.No.s02l202s)

¶22

Counsel for defendant filed vakalath but failed to file WS. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and she exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.8. In view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the oA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.44,O8,129.O9ps (Rupees Forty Four Lakhs Eight Thousand One Hundred Twenty Nine and paise nine only) with future interest @ 11.75olo p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization.

¶24

The Applicant bank is entiUed to proceed against the hypothecated movables as mentioned the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt due.

¶25

The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant towards realization of the debt due.

¶26

to the costs of the OA.

¶27

within two weeks from the date of receipt or or0e$. APB 206 :

¶28

(OA.No.502/2025)

¶29

13. Issue Recovery ceftificate accordingly.

¶30

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶31

(Dictated to the P,A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 6th day of April, 2026)

sdl-

(6. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

64"8b
'%
,itv S
o6APRzm :
;
@trffiP

¶36

GOPY
TRU ,,,J,
'{st. Rcqist"'
'.r. Hv. 0ERAt'f'f

¶37

Canara Bank v. M/S. Kisan Agri Shop

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Kisan Agri Shop

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

State Bank of India versus Mr. Mareedu Ajay

Mr Anwar Basha Shaik and another versus Gic Housing Finance Ltd.

Sandeboina Jayamma and Ors. versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Siddi Vinayak Poly Fibers

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Jalaram Jute and Polymers

Hdfc Bank versus Mr. Saikumar Palem