Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. Penmatsa Krishnam Raju

DRT30 Oct 2025OA/103/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal adjudicated an Original Application for recovery. Being on ex-parte, the Tribunal held the defendants liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and allowed the application, granting recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.3,19,69,003.08 with future interest; OA claim secured by mortgage; Recovery Certificate issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Penmatsa Krishnam Raju — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD OATED THiS THE 3OrH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com., L,LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 103 OF 2025

¶3

Kotak tvtah indra Bank Ltd., Having its Branch Office at 6- 3^- 7 109 / t / P / 302, 3rd Ftoot Jewel Pavani Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-5OOOB2. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶4

.... .Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. Penmatsa Krishnam Raju S/o. Ranga Raju, Aged about 43 years Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.Z2_94/2 Flat No.503, Block C, f4MR Vadiapudi Plaza, Gollapudi, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh - S2L22S.

¶7

Also at:-

¶8

R/o. Flat No.302, DSR Fortune prime Block B, cafoor Nagar, Madhapur Hyderabad - 500081.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

R/o. H. No.761 10/29, Ground Floor Gandhi Bomma Road, Bhavanipuram Hyderabad - 500081.

¶11

l.4rs. Penmatsa Vijaya Lakshmi Wo.^{Krishnam Raju,} Aged about 40^years Occ: Self Employed, R/ o.N.No.22-84 /2 Flat No.503, Block C, lr4MR Vadiapudi Plaza, Gollapudi, Vljayawada Andhra Pradesh - 527225.

¶12

.. . Defenda nts

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant

¶14

: M/s. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-parte^.

1/Y:'ow

oA.NO.1o3/202s

:: ORDER^::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of^{Rs.3,19,69,00308ps from the defendantsjointlyand} severally^{with future interest @18yop afrom the date of} application^{till the date of realization along with costs and in} default^{for sale of OA scheduleproperty'}

¶22

paper publication.^They

¶23

1. Summons^{served on D1 and 2 through} called absent^{and no}

¶24

were set^{ex-parte on 24} '06 '2025^as representation.

¶25

The Applicant^{Bank examined P Sridhar Reddy' Senior Manager'} as AW-1^{and marked 18 documents through him as Ex A l to} Ex. A.18.

¶26

Heard the Ld.^{Counselfor the Applicant Bank' Perused the} material Placed^{on record.}

¶27

The^point that^{arises for considerationis:-}

¶28

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled} for the ctaim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants and^{OA schedule} propertY?

¶29

As stated supra, the Defendants^{remained ex-parte. The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs. A.1 to A.18^marked on^{behalfof the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim of the Applicant^{Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^{jointly and severallyliable} to^pay the OA claim to the^{Applicant Bank with future interest} and costs. fig,o*

¶30

oA.NO.1o3/2025

¶31

¶32

In the result, the^{present Original Application No'103/2025is} allowed as under:^-

¶33

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.3,19,69,003,08ps^{with future interest} @8.75olo^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till^{the date of realization;}

¶34

ii) the OA claim^{is secured by way of mortgage} of property described^{inthe schedule} annexed to the^{OA and the applicant bank is} entitled to^{proceedagainstthe same to} realise its debt;

¶35

iii) the applicant bank^{is also entitled to proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendants for^{realization of its dues;}

¶36

iv) the applicant^{bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶37

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this Order'}

¶38

Issue RecoverY^{Certificate accordinglY.}

¶39

Communicate^{a coPY of this order} to the^{parties concerned.} pronounced by me in^{the open court on}

¶40

(Dictated to the steno,^{corrected,slgnedand} this the 3oth^{Day of October,2025).}

¶41

frw*o

¶42

1nf,#snwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. Penmatsa Krishnam Raju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Mr. Penmatsa Krishnam Raju

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

Ms SIta Trading versus Union Bank of India

Kapeeshwar Roto Packaging Pvt. Ltd. versus Union Bank of India

Andhra Pradesh Grameena Bank versus Mr. K Manohar

Hdfc Bank versus Sri Laxmi Fertilizers

Bank of Baroda versus Dasari Janardhana

Bank of Baroda versus Mr. Seemala Sivaprasad