Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Mittapalli Agro Exports vs INDIAN BANK on 9 June 2026
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL
VISAKHAPATNAM**
Present: - Sri Krishna Gopal Dwivedi,
Presiding Officer
Dated the 09<sup>th</sup> day of June, 2026
M.A.No.05 of 2026 IN S.A.No.352 of 2025
**Between:-**
1. 1. Mittapalli Agro Exports, Rep. by its Partners – Mr. Mittapalli Ramesh Babu & Miss Mittapalli Lakshmi Susmitha, R/o. Door No.5-90-56, 5/3 Lane, Chandra Mouli Nagar, Guntur – 522007.
2. 2. Mr. Mittapalli Ramesh Babu, S/o. Mr. Panduranga Rao, R/o. Door No.4-19-94/1, Vikas Nagar, 6<sup>th</sup> Lane, Guntur – 522007.
.....Applicants
**And**
1. 1. The Authorized Officer Indian Bank, M C Road Branch, Naaz Center, Guntur.
2. 2. Indian Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager Naaz Center, Guntur.
.....Respondents/OP
**Present:**
Sri. A. Siva Koteswara Rao, Advocate, for applicant.
Smt. Sanam Padmaja, Advocate, for respondents.
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**
In the above Miscellaneous Application, the applicant has prayed to set aside the dismissal order dated 20.08.2025 passed in S.A.No.352 of 2025 by restoring the same on record for hearing the matter on merits.
The OP/respondent bank has filed counter on 17.03.2026. In the counter, the respondent has prayed to dismiss the M.A. with exemplary costs and pass order in favour of the respondent bank. The respondent bank has also filed written arguments which is on record.
The Ld. Counsel of the applicant submitted that the applicant had filed M.A.No.96/2025 in that M.A.No.96/2025 is allowed by this Tribunal vide order dated 19.01.2026, and the delay of 10 days was condoned and it is set aside petition since delay is condoned by this Tribunal.
Hence, in the interest of justice, set aside the dismissal order passed on 20.08.2025 in S.A.No.352 of 2025.
The Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank submitted that the respondent had never issued any sale notice, hence this S.A. is not maintainable. The respondent never got issued any sale notice, dated 12.05.2025 fixing the auction on 25.06.2025 and sale notice was published in the newspapers as per the rule. The Advocate Commissioner did not execute the warrant on 28.05.2025, hence Advocate Commissioner Warrant has become infructuous.
After perusal of the record, I find that the applicant wants in this M.A. to set aside the dismissal order dated 20.08.2025 passed in S.A.No.352 of 2025. As per petitioner, the notice was misplaced by the clerk, hence petitioner could not file proof of service before this Tribunal and due to health issues, also the applicant was unable to contact the advocate. Hence, the S.A. was dismissed for default on 20.08.2025.
The Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted counter on the merits of the S.A., but at present this M.A. is for hearing. Hence, at this stage it is not proper to consider the merits / demerits of the S.A, it will be look at the proper stage.
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 20.08.2025 passed in S.A.No.352 of 2025 is here by set aside and restore the S.A.No.352 of 2025 on its original number and direct the Ld. Registrar to register the S.A. on its original number. Both parties are present. Hence, fix the S.A.No.352 of 2025 for hearing on 22/07/2026.
Accordingly, the above M.A.No.05/2026 is hereby allowed on contest without costs.
[Dictated to steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this 09<sup>th</sup> day of June, 2026.]