In ex parte proceedings, the Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed a Securitisation Application filed by the applicant challenging a possession notice issued under the SARFAESI Act. finding no infraction of procedural requirements.
The Securitisation Application was dismissed. All interlocutory applications pending were closed. No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - II AT HYDERABAD
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2026
PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com, L.LB.(Hons.),M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER
Securitization Application No. 324OF 2025
Bobbati Ashok Kumar Reddy S/o B. Prabhakar Reddy Flat No.504, 4th Floor, D. No.25-696-C-509, Srinivasa Nagar, 25thWard, Nandyala Town, Nandyala District - 513 501
.....'.Applicant
Versus
Canara Bank, RS Road, Nandayal Branch, Beside Erasi Paradise Sy No 69/1, Opp MuniciPalOffice, Nandyal, Andhra Pradesh- 518501 Represented by its Authorized Officer
.. ....Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr' LankaJagannadham. Counsel for Respondent: M/s. K.V. NageswaraRao'
-:8-EB:-
Page 2 of 4
sA No. 324l202s
Page 3 of 4
SA No.32412025
Applicant and published in Ihe Hans India English Daily and Vaartha Telugu daily on 05.07.2025. Thus, there is no violation ofprovisions of the SARFAESI Act and the Rules. Respondent classified the loan accounts as an NPA as per RBIguideline and the fespondent bank has strictly followed the due procedure prescribed under the Act, 2002 and the Rules thereunder. Hence the SA is liable to be dismissed.
Whether the applicant made out any valid ground to quash any of the measures initiated by the respondent against the SA schedule properties as prayed for?
ii) To what relief?
Point No.(i):
Page 4 of4
SANo.324l2g2s
Point No.(ii):
(Typed to my dictotion by the ps, corrected, signed ond pronounced by me in the open court on this the 22" doy ol May, 2026).
PRESIDING OFFICER
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant established any valid ground to quash the measures initiated by the respondent against the schedule properties challenged in the Securitisation Application?
What relief should be granted to the applicant?
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Bobbati Ashok Kumar Reddy
Canara Bank
Rameshwar Kothe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
