Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy

DRT25 Jun 2025OA/131/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Debt Recovery Tribunal's original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 34,34,367.39ps plus future interest and costs against the respondent, who remained ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendant liable to pay Rs. 34,34,367.39ps with future interest, costs; Bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant's properties.

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT: SH. RAIYESHWAR KoTHE, B.com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN No: 131 oF 2023

¶3

H DFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at 1_10_60/3, 3'' Floor, Suryodaya Complex. Begumpet, Secunderabad Mandal, Hyderabad - 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶4

.....Applica nt.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. Pa lagulla Shenkar Reddv. S/o. PV Ramana Reddy, Aged about 32^years, Occ: private Employee, R/o.ptot No.38 & 39. IInd Floor, Kista Reddy Colony, Gandhamguda, Hyderabad - 5O0086.

¶7

Also at:-

¶8

1.4 r. Palagutta Shenkar Reddy, C/o. Tech Mahindra Ltd., Plot No.22-25, 27 to 34, Hitech City, Madhapur, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad-S00081.

¶9

... Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant Defendant :: ORDER::

¶11

[4/s. M. Srinivas Reddy

¶12

Ex-parte

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.34,34,367.39ps from ' the 'nt ffii-with defe_ndant with rf utu nre

¶14

oA.NO.131/2023

¶15

¶16

interest @18o/o^{p.a. with monthly rests from 21 11 2022 till the} date of^{realization along with costs and in defaultfor sale of} hyPothecated^vehicle'

¶17

Summon^{servedon sole defendant throughpaperpublication} and was^{set ex-parte on 28 06 2023 as called absent and no} rePresentation'

¶18

The Applicant^{Bank examined SumayaShaik' Legal Manager'as} AW-1 and marked^{12 documents throuqh her as Ex A lto} Ex.A.12.

¶19

Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bankstated orders may be passed} on merits.^{Perused the materialplaced on record'}

¶20

The^{point that arises for considerationis:-}

¶21

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendant^{and OA h\Pothecated} vehicle?

¶22

As^{stated supra, the Defendant remainedex-parteThe} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1^{to A 12 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the Applicant Bank againstthe Defendant'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendant is liableto pay the OA claimto} the ApPlicant^{Bank with future interestand costs'}

¶23

In the^{result, the present OriginalApplication No'131/2023is} allowed as^{under: -}

¶24

The Defendant ls^{liable to pay to the}

¶25

i) Applicant Bank a sum^{of Rs- 34,34,367'39ps} eV**

¶26

oA.NO.131/2023

¶27

with future interest @7.50o/o p.a. simple from the date of application titt the date of realization;

¶28

ti) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debu

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶33

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 25th Day oflune, 2025).

¶34

firur" (RAfqESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy

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

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Bheemji Bhukya

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. G Sreenivasulu Reddy