Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mr. Vedighar Nagaraju

DRT19 Feb 2026TA/4/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bank argued for recovery of Rs.47.73 lakh plus interest under a transfer application. As defendants were absent, the court held based on the bank's evidence that the claim was established, allowing the application and directing recovery proceedings against all defendant assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 47,73,885/- with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged and personal properties; costs awarded.

Canara Bank versus Mr. Vedighar Nagaraju — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TRANSFER APPLICATION No: 04 OF 2025

¶4

Canara Bank Borabanda Branch Situated at H.No. 8-3-157/K/1, Plot No.l,Vishwa Hights, Kalya Nagar, Venture-3 Borabanda, Hyderabad500018.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Vedighar Nagaraju w/o Sri Vedighar Kishan Rao Aged: 43 years, OccL Business R/o. Flat No. 403, Laxmi Archade, Ganesh Temple, Friends Colony, H ydera bad- 500050.

¶8

Also at: C/o ME2 Lady Shoppe #5-138, NH65, Ganagaram, Chanda Nagar, Hyderabad-500050.

¶9

M/s. Beccun Infrastructure Limited Represented by its Managing Director Mr. P. Prashant Kumar and Mr. Ratan Prasad Director, Regd. Office at 102, Model House Punjagutta, Hyderabad-500082.

¶10

...Defendants.

¶11

: Mr. M. Srinivas Counsel for the Applicant

¶12

Defendants : Ex-oarte - ul*k6>\

¶13

TA.NO.04/202s

¶14

:: ORDER ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.47,73,885/- from the defendants with future interest @11.55olo,^p.a. from the date of filing till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of mortgaged properties.

¶16

Publication filed for D1 and D2. They were set exparte on 77.02.2026 as called absent no representation.

¶17

The Applica nt Bank examined Ms. Niket Satyavan Sahare, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.72.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA Scheduled properties?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Transfer npptica-tion No.O4l2025 is allowed as under: - /frrnz ,,\

¶23

/frrnz ,,\ (-l/>"q$t'

¶24

TA.NO.O4l2025

¶25

i) The Defendants are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 47,73,885/- with future interest @9.650lo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶27

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant for realization of its dues;

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the L9th Day of february, 2026).

¶32

\YA

¶33

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mr. Vedighar Nagaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mr. Vedighar Nagaraju

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

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. Veldi Ramesh Fruits Merchants.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Vijaya Surya Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Ajmeera Suguna

Sree Parmeswara Co. and others versus Icici Bank Limited

Bharat Iti Mr S Rajashekar Reddy versus Wardhaman Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Idfc First Bank Limited Now versus M/s. Crystal Management Services.