Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Takkan Venkatesh

DRT25 Jun 2025OA/117/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a defaulted loan amount with future interest and costs, holding the defendants jointly and severally liable and permitting realization through hypothecated vehicle and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.21,43,055.10 with future interest; bank entitled to realize debt via hypothecated vehicle and defendant properties; recovery certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Takkan Venkatesh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 117 OF 2025

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited., Plot No.12, Nanakramguda Gachibowli, ICICI Towers, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ta kkan Venkatesh,

¶8

S/o. Ramnath Ta kka n,

¶9

Age 42 Years, Occ: Self Employe, H.No.3-12l2, Bhosi, Near Water Tank, Adila bad - 504103, TS.

¶10

Takkan Uma, W/o.Takkan Venkatesh, Age 40 Years, Occ: Self Employe, H.No.3-12l2, Bhosi, Near Water Tank, Ad ila bad - 504103, TS.

¶11

Talluri Ravi Ka nth, S/o,Talluri Shiva Ramaiah, Age 43 Years, Occ: Business,

¶12

H. No.8- 18/2, Srinagar Varni lYandalam, Near Bus Stop, N izama bad-503201, TS.

¶13

.. . Defendants

¶14

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.G.Adrian Kiran Raj

Defendants

: Ex- parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.21,43,055.1ops as on 25.10.2024 from the k*"

¶19

oA.NO.117l202s

¶20

defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @2490^p.a. with monthly rests from 25.1O.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶21

Summons served on D1 to 3. They were set ex-parte on 11.04.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶22

The Applicant Bank examined Kalva Rajayaswanth, Area Relationship l.4anager, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.12.

¶23

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed through merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶24

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶25

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶26

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals ln 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 jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶27

In the result, the present Original Application No.117l2025 is allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Appli(="^'W'#g

¶29

oA.NO.117l2025

¶30

¶31

Rs.21,43,055.10ps as^{on 25.10'2024with} future interest @11.75olo^{p.a. simple from the} date of application till^{the date of realization;}

¶32

ii) the OA claim is^{secured bY way of} hypothecation of vehicle^{described in the} schedule annexed to the^{OA and the} applicant bank is^{entitledto proceed against} the same to realise^{its debt;}

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

o Issue Recovery Certificate^{according ly.}

¶37

Communicate^{a copy of this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno, corrected,^{signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 25th Day^{of June, 2025).}

¶38

/)S'os"* lkfiesnweR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Takkan Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Takkan Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Vishnu Infra Projects

Union Bank of India versus narayana swamy

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sai Surface Coating Technologies

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy

Canara Bank versus M/S. Shree Jslv Infra Pvt. Limited

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Bheemji Bhukya