Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rohith Trading Company

DRT23 Mar 2026OA/94/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DT reduced the applicants bank's claim for recovery of a loan principal, interest, and future interest with future interest were granted uniformly and severally liability imposed on all respondents.

What did the court decide?

Respondents jointly and severally liable to pay total sum of Rs.32,33,072.71 plus future interest at 18% p.a., and bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged properties.

Canara Bank versus M/S. Rohith Trading Company — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAy OF MARCH, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER OA.No.94 ot 2O26

¶3

Between:

¶4

Canara Bank, Nizamabad Main Branch, Nizamabail, TS Rep by its Senior Manager

¶5

Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

M/-..^nti,ith Trading Company, Rep b'., itss Prop. Sri Teju Kumar Das, H.No.6-26-376/ 1, Dubba Shradhanand Gunj, Nizamabad

¶8

Torvn. Nizamabad dist - 503 OO2.

¶9

Sri Trrr, I(umar Das, s/o^-1 .^g Mahendar Das, aged rbut 30 years, prop for M/s. i.tohith Trading Company, R/,; H. No.6-2 6-37 6/ t, Dubba Shr --:.ranand Gunj, Nizamabad

¶10

Torryn. [Jizamabad dist - 503 002.

¶11

Sn Irr^r'larayan Kumar (guarantor Ancl n orrgagor) s/o Tcjir Mahendar Das, ag,,r' r';lt 30 years,^prop for M/:;^{. ,} hith Trading Company, R/,r, r ..6-26-376/t, Dubba Shi-;:^-.and Gunj, Nizamabad Trr,',r ramabad dist Defendants .d. Counse' ,ite Pa For the , , ,.-:nt Naga Durga Prasad For the i)^. 'la nts

¶12

(oA.s4l2026l

¶13

Reserved oir 16.03.2026 PronounceC on 23.03.2026 Uploaded in website on 23.03.2026

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Th.: ' , licant Bank filed the present OA against defendants for reco\ r ry of a total sum of Rs.32,33,O72.71ps (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Thirty Three Thousand and Seventy Two and paise seve r i, one only) with future interest @ 18olo p.a from date of filing of oi1^'",1i the date of realization and in defaurt for sale of mortgaged propelv as mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶16

As pe '1','-' averments in the apprication, the Appricant Bank states that defenr'rnt no.1 is a proprietary concern represented by its proprietor / l\ef^.rant no'2 avaired oD roan of Rs.30.00 rakhs and executed cash creCir^.qreement on 25.10.2023 and pronote dated 31.10.2023. p";s6'rrnt no'3 stood as guarantor and mortgaged the schedure prope,i', and deposited the tiile deeds in favour of Applicant Bank. Afr^{,?, ,-iling} the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply the terms "r sanction, hence the appricant bank crassified the account as NPA :. 27.08.2025 and issued demand notice dated 28,0g.2025.

¶17

I' and demands, the defendants did not clear -!. 3. D,rr', , r LstalrAUnOry6t a{ exparte on 16.03.2026.

¶18

(oA.s4l2026l

¶19

Mr' 11. Jaikiran, senior Manager of the Appricant Bank examined himseii :s AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex. ,.1 to A.23.

¶20

H,--,.lrd "^,: Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶21

The plr rt that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant Bank is entitr:C for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants as pl cr! , -'r?

¶22

Defen' r'ts remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Aprlicant Bank, AW.1, officiar of the Appricant Bank was examined and he ex^'rted rerevant documents as Ex.A1 to A.23. In view of the dbcvt^qold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in U-'" \ against the Defendants and hence the Appricant Bank is en.-r^' r recover the craim made in the oA with future interest and cos^j-c

¶23

In ri' ''tlt, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under: Th C D'' rdants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Ba nk I trtal sum of of Rs.32,33,O72.71ps (Rupees Thirty Two La nd and Seventy Two and paise Se re interest @ 18o/o p.a from date of filing of, 5^',!.3.f;ifi iiii"r!

¶24

(oA.s4l2026l

¶25

The r^.;;p;lcant bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged property as mentioned in the schedule to OA towards realization of the debt -r':.

¶26

Th-. A^' .ant Bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and proper'ies of defendant No.2 and properties of defendant no.1 firm

¶27

tor,ra:'- r-ealization of the debt due,

¶28

The ^,'' '.ant Bank is entitled to the costs of the OA.

¶29

The Ar-ricant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date oF rc.^i-' of order.

¶30

IssLre P.^-1very certificate accordingly.

¶31

Comnn,'^':ate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶32

(Dictn:,rd I r ir.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this tht 2 ' of March, 2026)

sdl-

(G. GOPTCHAND)

PRESIDING OFFICER

2 3 ilAR 2020 *
r3

TRUE COPY

,Ant.Rcd*er^L)l9 C.ir^{J, H'ffirP.4E.rt1}

¶39

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rohith Trading Company

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S. Rohith Trading Company

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S.Mohini Podupu Sangham

Kavitha Enterprises versus State Bank of India

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Our Basket

Canara Bank versus M/S. Sravanthi Powelooms Industry

State Bank of India versus Mr. Arun Kumar Mantoor

Balagouni Balraj Goud versus Shriram Finance Limited