Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S.Sainath Plastic Industries

DRT2 Apr 2026OA/608/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the OA filed by Bank of India against a proprietary concern and its proprietor for recovery of loan amounts totaling Rs. 47.53 lakhs along with future interest and proceedings against mortgaged assets.

What did the court decide?

Direction to defendants to repay Rs. 47,53,432.71 with cumulative interest; authority to sell hypothecated movables and attach other properties; issuance of recovery certificate.

Bank of India versus M/S.Sainath Plastic Industries — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE zilD DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

OA.No.5O8 of 2025

¶5

Between:

¶6

Bank of India, Hyderabad Main Branch, Nampally station road, Abids, Hyderabad, TS. Rep by its Authorised officer

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Sainath Plastic Industries, A proprietary concern,

¶10

Represented by its Proprietor Mr. Gunagunti Chander Rao, Unit at pot no.35, Phase-I, IDA cherlapally, Medchal,

¶11

Malkajgiri district, TS - 500 051.

¶12

¶13

Regd office at flat no.401, 4th floor, Laxmi Mega Towers, Pet basheerbad, Kompally, Behind SPG Grand hotel, Hyderabad - 500 055.

¶14

Mr. Gunagunti Chander Rao, s/o Laxmaiah, aged about 51 years, occ: business, male, R/o D.No.12-1-779, shanti nagar, North Lalaguda, Lalaguda, - 500 036.

Defendants

Counsel for

For the

For the

Sri V. Sethu Madhava Rao Exparte

¶20

(oA. No.608/202s)

¶21

Reserved on	2s.03.2026
Pronounced on	02.04.2026
Uploaded inwebsiteon	02.04.2026

¶22

ORDER

¶23

1, The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.47F3,432,71ps (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Two and paise Seventy one only) i.e.,

¶24

a) A sum of Rs.20,25,997.7Lps with subsequent interest @ 13.85o/o p.a (11.85o/o + 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶25

b) A sum of Rs.27,27,435/- with subsequent interest @ 12.75o/o p.a (lO.75o/o + 2olo penal) with monthly rests from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶26

and in default for sale of hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶27

As^per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that defendant no,1 is a Proprietary concern represented by its^proprietor/ defendant no.2 availed term loan facility of Rs.69.50 lakhs and cash

¶28

credii'litnit of Rs.25.OO lakhs. The defendants executed demand ".! r::6 .i;.^. .. . .- . "_

¶29

.FrQrrrissory ,r'l^{i {,lote,} 'ri^{''FYppthecation cum loan agreement,MCLR}

¶30

:i -,. .,i ir d*f$noants hvpothecated all the movables as

¶31

id:""OU,rglF.rnl!" l,^.,.::,. ," ."1,,, i ' .:.r:'..: 2 .,,... , ,:

¶32

. -_, -.-...,-,.t-'^i-rr."..:

¶33

(OA.No.G08/202s)

¶34

mentioned in the schedule to OA in favour of Applicant bank and executed aI necessary documents. After avairing the roan facirities, the defendants faired to compry the terms of sanction, hence the appricant bank crassified the account as NpA on 05.03.2025 and issued notices. Inspite of severar requests and demands, the defendants did not clear the outstanding. Hence this OA.

¶35

Defendants called absent and set exparte on 25.03.2026.

¶36

Mrs. R. Rekha, Senior Manager of the Applicant Bank examined herself as AW.1 and exhibited rerevant documents, which are markecr as Ex.A.1 to A.19.

¶37

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶38

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is

¶39

entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as prayed for?

¶40

Defendants remained exparte. 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.19. In view of the above, ' I hord thgt the Apprican-t Bank has estabrished their craim made I{hg ",1^{On against_ttk Defendants and hence the Applicant} Bank is ' !,."'$, \ r ntitled to iecove. ffS [Li, -ri made in the oA with future interest and

¶41

(oA.N0.608/2025)

¶42

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

¶43

The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.47,S3,432.7,-ps (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand Four Hundred Thirty Two and paise Seventy one only) i.e.,

¶44

a) A sum of Rs.20,25,997.71ps with subsequent interest @ 11.850/o p.a from date of firing of oA tifl the date of rearization;

¶45

b) A sum of Rs.27,27,435/- with subsequent interest @ 10.75olo p.a from date of filing of OA till the date of realization;

¶46

9' The Applicant bank is entifled to proceed against the hypothecated movables as mentioned in the schedule to oA towards realization of the debt due.

¶47

10' The Applicant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant No,2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm towards realization of the debt due.

¶48

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

¶49

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

¶50

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶51

a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶52

by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on

¶53

sdl-
rltUhcow,
*
(G. GOPTCHAND)
oz lrpn'zw fl,.r I)%frv
esstfrcgktrar PRESIDING OFF!CER
DRT4, u,tDERAI/t"tr.
4

Bank of India v. M/S.Sainath Plastic Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S.Sainath Plastic Industries

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sri. Challa Raghupathi Rao

State Bank of India versus Mr. Malthumkar Sunil Kumar

State Bank of India versus Mr.S. Narasing Rao

Hdfc Bank versus M/S. Mende Srinivas Innovations

State Bank of India versus M/S. Ramavath Ramaja Dairy Farm

State Bank of India versus M/S. Pathulothu Sridevi Dairy Farm