Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri Laxmi Powerloom Industry

DRT11 Mar 2026OA/62/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an overnight application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of a term loan, cash credit, and OD amount. The debtor firm failed to repay, leading to NPA classification. The Tribunal found the bank established its claim prima facie.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 1,90,93,714.71 with future interest at 11.65% p.a.; permission to proceed against mortgaged, guarantor, and firm properties issued; recovery

Canara Bank versus Sri Laxmi Powerloom Industry — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE llrH DAy OF MARCH, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER

OA.No.62 ot 2O26

Between:

Canara Bank,

Hanamkonda-II branch, H.No.2-5-39, Water Tank road, Near Naveena Children Hospital, Nakkalgutta, Hanamkonda, Warangal dist - 506 001. TS. Represented by its Chief Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

M/s. Sri Laxmi powerloom Industry, Prop: Pabba^pranathi, w/o Srinivas,^plot no.326,

¶10

survey no.l79I/1, Kakatiya Textile park, Madikonda village, Kazipet mandal, Warangal urban Dist, Telangana.

¶11

Smt Pabba pranathi,

¶12

Guaranto r, W / o Srin ivas, Aged 49 yers, occ: business, R/o 3-36, Ootai village, Kothaguda mandal, Warangal Rural dist - 506 135.

¶13

,l 1 ilAR ?026

¶14

Counsel for the^parties:

¶15

For the Applicant

¶16

Reserved on Pronounced on

¶17

Uploaded in website on

Sri T. Sasi Kumar

09.03.2026

11.03.2026

L1.03.2026

(oA.No.62l2026)

ORDER

The Applicant Bank fired the present oA against Defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,9O,93,714.71ps (Rupees One crore Ninety Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand seven Hundred Fourteen and paise seventy Seven only) with future interest @ rl.650/o p.a with monthry rests from date of firing of oA ti[ the date of realization and in defaurt for sare of mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶25

As per the averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defendant 1 is a^proprietary concern represented by its proprietor/ defendant no.2 availed term loan of Rs.g5.55 lakhs and cash credit of Rs.15.00 lakhs in MSME loan on 27.60.20L9 and also availed OD facility of Rs.9,50,000/-. The defendants executed the loan and security documents and executed equitabre mortgage over the schedule property by deposit of titre deeds in favour of appricant bank. After availing the loan facilities, the defendants faired to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 29.10.2023 and issued demand notice dated 2L.02.2025. ,ntr,."..,ot t"*1r::On:sts and demands, the defendants did not ctear

¶26

the olts"tandi 19,,'ff"nqu'thir OA.
i'. !' i:v SJ 'ri r +,
"o{. {
3.
o{{oanis4aflffi ffient *b ,"t exparte on 0e.03.2026.
:ll
t, '
2

¶27

(oA.No.6212026)

¶28

4' Sri B' Madhava Reddy, Chief Managerof theApplicantBankexamined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.21.

¶29

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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.A1 to A.21. In 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.

¶33

B. In the result, the present oA is ailowed with costs, as under:

¶34

The Defendants are joinuy and severaily riabre to pay to the Appricant Bank a total sum of Rs.l,go,gg,ll4.77ps (Rupees one crore Ninety Lakhs Ninety Three Thousand seven Hundred Fourteen

¶35

and Seven only) with future interest @ 11.65% p.a 6e$&tl$ till the date of realization ;

¶36

¶37

(oA.No.6212026)

¶38

The Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realisation of the debt due.

¶39

10' The Applicant Bank is atso 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.

¶40

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

¶41

L2' The Applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶42

Issue Recovery certificate accordingly.

¶43

L4. communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶44

(Dictated to the P'A', tra.nscribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 11th day of March, 2026)

¶45

sdl-

¶46

'.,ffi
'l*l.i 11;1frnM
<br>

¶47

(G. GOPTCHAND) PRESIDTNG OFFICER

¶48

trw

¶49

Canara Bank v. Sri Laxmi Powerloom Industry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri Laxmi Powerloom Industry

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 Mrs. Aleti Aruna

State Bank of India versus Gootty Chandra Sekhar

Idbi Bank Limited versus Sri. K. Venkataiah Goud

Canara Bank versus Smt. Padmamma

State Bank of India versus Dommati Sai Krishna

State Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Kanakadurga Industry