Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Naresh Vallal

DRT16 Sept 2025OA/170/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery, the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for a debt of Rs. 2.6 Crores against ex-parte defendants. The claim, supported by marked documents, was secured by mortgage, and an order for a recovery certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 2.62 Crores with interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued; Enforcement of mortgage directed.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Naresh Vallal — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

]N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN No: 170 oF 2025

¶4

Karnataka Bank Ltd., Serilinga mpa lly, Madapur Branch Kruthika Lay Out, Near Image Garden Plot No.12, Ground Floor, Image Gardens Road, Function Hall Lane Madhapur, Ranga Reddy, Telangana-500091. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

. ....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Naresh Vallal, S/o.covind Vallat Aged about 40 Years, Occ: Business H. No.5- 15- 128, West t'tarredpally New SBH Colony, Secunderabad - 500026.

¶8

Mrs. Susmitha Vallal, W/o.Naresh Vallal

¶9

lvlajor, Occ: House Wife H. No.5- 15- 128, West Marredpa y New SBH Colony, Secunderabad - 500026.

¶10

.,.Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Smt. R. Aruna Defendants : Ex-parte

¶12

:: ORDER ::

¶13

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.2,62,51,255.73ps from the defendants joinuy and severally with future interest @10.40olo p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization alonq with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule prop.nr.,/funn* ' '7 .""

¶14

oA.NO.170/202s

¶15

Summons served on^{D1 and 2 through} paper publication. They called absent and^no were set ex-parte on 29.07.2025^as representation.

¶16

The Applicant^{Bank examinedK.NameswaraRao, Senlor} Manager, as AW-1 and^{marked07 documentsthrough himas} Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶17

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.^{Perused the} material placed on record.

¶18

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶19

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶20

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the 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 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.

¶21

In the result, the present Original Application No.170/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶22

The i) Defendants are jointly and severally lia b le to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.2,62,51,255.73p5 with future ffi*e

¶23

oA.NO.L7O|2O25

¶24

¶25

interest @9.25olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its deb[

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

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

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

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 15th Day of September, 2025).

¶32

Ow-e (CAMESHWAR KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Naresh Vallal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Naresh Vallal

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Nivansh Modulars

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Ramesh Paper Plate Supply

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Mohammed Fareeduddin

Yes Bank versus Nellikanti Lingaiah

Manadala Sriramulu versus Union Bank of India

A Kishore Chowdary versus Union Bank of India