Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Hr Enterprises

DRT24 Oct 2025OA/131/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the DT-II at Hyderabad, acting under the SARFAESI Act, allowed Original Application No. 131 of 2025 filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. against defendants HR Enterprises and Vemireddy Raja Ramesh Reddy for recovery of dues of Rs. 43,63,290.78 plus interest and costs, passed in the absence of defendants.

What did the court decide?

Order passed for defendants to pay Rs. 43,63,290.78 with future interest at 17% p.a. simple, costs, and direction to file cost memo.

Icici Bank Limited versus Hr Enterprises — DRT (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24IH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR-KoTHE, B.com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Original Application No: 131 OF 2025

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd., ICICI Towers, cachibowli Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

...Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

HR Enterprises., Rep by its Proprietor

¶9

H.No.8Zp, Laxminagar Colony Kukatpa y, Hyderabad _ 500072.

¶10

Vemireddy Raja Ramesh Reddy S/o. Venkata Subba Vemireddy Age 42^years, Occ: Business

¶11

H.No.87lp, Laxminagar Colony Kukatpally, Hyderabad - 5OOO72.

¶12

......Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. Lotus Law Associates Defendants : Ex_parteEx_parte

¶14

: Ex_parteEx_parte

¶15

:: ORDER ::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.43,63,290.78ps from the defendants joinuy and severally with future interest @!7o/o p.a. compounded with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶17

Summons served on 01 & 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 05.08.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

/z$w/ ^b

¶19

///"-'n..t'" L},'

¶20

OA.No.131/2025

¶21

¶22

K.Raja Yaswanth,^{AreaRelationship}

¶23

The Applicant^{Bank examined} 07 documents^{through him as Ex'}

¶24

Manager^{as Aw-1 and marked} A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶25

Ld. Counsel^{for the} Applicant^{Bank stated ordersmay be passed on} merits and Perused the material Placed^{on record'}

¶26

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

¶27

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled for} the claim^{made in the OA against the} Defendants?

¶28

As stated^{supra,the Defendantsremained ex-parte' The Evidence} Affidavit^{coupled withthe recitals in the documents viz} '^{Exs A'1 to} A.07 marked^{on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of} the Applicant^{Bank against the DefendantsHence' I holdthat the} Defendants^{are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claimto} the Applicant^{Bank with futureinterestand costs'}

¶29

In the result,^{the present Original ApplicationNo 131/2025 is} allowed as^under:-

¶30

i) The Defendants^{are jointly and severally liable to pay to} the Applicant^{Bank a sum of Rs.43,63,29078ps with} future interest @17olo^{p.a. simple, from the date of} application till the^{date of realization;}

¶31

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^{proceed against} the^person and properties of^{the defendantfor} realization of its dues;

¶32

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for^{the costs.}

¶33

ffi'"e

¶34

OA.No.131/2025

¶35

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to^{file CostMemowithin 2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order'

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the parties concerned'} (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by hlm, corrected,^{signedand pronouncedbyme in the} open court on this the 24th day of^{october, 2025).}

¶38

PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Hr Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Hr Enterprises

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

Icici Bank Limited versus K R Agency

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S. Rabbani Silk Emporium

T Lalitha Kalyani versus State Bank of India

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Jetpat Komuraiah

State Bank of India versus Digital Technology Services, Rep. by Its Proprietor

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. G. Veera Gangadhara Kasi