Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
DENA BANK vs SHAIK AHMED on 4 February 2026
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL
VISAKHAPATNAM**
Present: - Sri Krishna Gopal Dwivedi,
Presiding Officer
Dated the 4<sup>th</sup> day of February, 2026
MA 03/2025
in
O.A.No.984 of 2016
Between
Bank of Baroda (E-Dena Bank), Vijayawada Branch, Rep. by its Senior Manager.
.....Petitioner/Applicant Bank
And
1. Mr. Shaik Ahmed, S/o Shaik Meera Saheb, D.No.1-10, Guntu Batula Vari Street, Kanikapadu, Vijayawada.
2. Mr. K. Ravi Kumar, S/o K. Krishna Murthy, #1-1 to 2-159, OC
Bazar, ST Colony, Motadaka Village, Tadikonda Mandal, Guntur District.
.....Respondents/Defendants
Present:
Sri. K. Muralidhar, Ld. Counsel for the applicant
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
**ORDER**
The petitioner has filed the present MA and prayed to set aside the dismissal order dt.17.01.2023 and restore the original OA 984/2016 in the interest of justice. As per MA, the matter was earlier looked after by the Branch Manager, Dena Bank. Consequently, upon the merger of Dena Bank with Bank of Baroda, some of the documents relating to the above OA were misplaced in the transitional change. Efforts were made to secure and trace out the documents and with great difficulty and painstaking search, documents were traced but with lots of delay and lapse of time. Meanwhile the Court was pleased to call the matter and dismiss the OA on 17.01.2023. It is submitted that more than 80 lakhs of public money is involved in the case and there is great urgency in recovering of the amount for public good.
Vide order dt.27.11.2025, the respondent is debarred from filing counter.
Vide order dt.06.11.2025, MA 08/2024 was allowed by this Tribunal condoning the delay of 386 days for filing restoration petition. In this case, more than 80 lakhs of public money is involved. Dena bank merged with the petitioner bank, hence applicant could not represent the matter. The petitioner bank has explained the delay and reason for dismissal, hence, in the interest of justice, I set aside the dismissal order dt.17.01.2023 passed in OA 984/2016 and direct the Ld. Registrar to register the OA 984/2016 on its original number. I direct the applicant to file necessary requisites to send notice to the defendants and also direct the Registrar to send notice to the defendants and fix the case for further hearing on 01.04.2026.
Accordingly, I allow MA 03/2025 without costs.
[Dictated to steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day of 4<sup>th</sup> February, 2026]
*[Handwritten signature and date: 4.02.2026]*
**PRESIDING OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM**