Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Gorijala Pavan Kumar

DRT17 Jun 2025OA/1/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by YES Bank Limited for recovery of Rs. 22,14,713.35 along with future interest and costs against Gorijala Pavan Kumar, who remained ex-parte. The bank was awarded the right to proceed against hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of sum of Rs. 22,14,713.35 with future interest and costs; recovery secured by hypothecated vehicles; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Gorijala Pavan Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

]N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF ]UNE, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 01 OF 2025

¶4

1.,1/s.YES Bank Limited., Office at 1-8-387, 2ND Floor, Agravanshi^plaza, HUDA Lane, S.P.Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applica nt.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.4r. Gorijala^pavan Kumar, S/o.Mr. Goriia la Narendra Naidu, #7-66, Nagayya Garj palli Kotata, Post Rarnireddy, palli panchayat, ChjLtoor, Tirupathr, Andhra p;adesh- 517102.

¶8

Also at:-

¶9

1.4r, Gorija la^pavan Kumar, C/o.Pure Soft Ware pvt Ltd., DLF Tower, B^plot No. t.t , Jasota, New Dethi, Dethi - 11OO,S.

¶10

Also at;-

¶11

1.4 r. Gorijala pavan Kumar. C/o. Itiljte Technologies pvt Ltd.. l] lg.lnooo^ara,^{Georse ThansaiahComptex,} 1J du l-eet Road, Indiranaoar. Bangalore, Karnataka - 56003g.

¶12

Also at:-

¶13

Mr. Gorija la^pavan Kumar, C/o, Estuate Software pvt Lt.t 4ll, 2nd Main,Industrial Area. Yeahanka New Town. Banaa lore Karnataka - 5660 79.

'll

...Defendant

oA.NO.0u202s

Counsel for^{the APP|icant}

:M/s.N.B.Sudarshan

Defenda nt

:Ex-parte

:: 9JSLB^::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of^{Rs.22,14,713.35psfrom the defendantwith future} interest @18o/o^{p.a. from the date of application till the date of} realization along^{with costs and in default for sale of} hypothecated^vehicles.

¶24

Summon^{servedon sole defendant and was set ex-parteon} 01.04.2025^{as called absentand no representation'}

¶25

The Applicant^{Bank examinedSai Pavan Gudivada'Legal} Manager,^{as AW-1and marked09 documentsthrough himas} Ex.A.1 to^Ex.A.09.

¶26

orders may^be Passed

¶27

1. Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank stated} on merits.^{Perusedthe materialplaced on} record.

¶28

The^{point that arises for considerationis:-}

¶29

Whether^{the ApplicantBank is entitled} for the^{claimmade in the OA against} the Defendant^{and OA hY\othecated} vehicles?

¶30

As stated^{supra, the Defendant remainedex-parteThe} Evidence^{Affldavitcoupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1^{to A.O9 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches^{the claim of the Applicant Bank,4€ainstthe Defendant.} Q(*f

¶31

oA.NO.ou2o2s

¶32

Hence, I hold that the^{Defendantis liable to pay the OA claim to} the Applicant Bank^{with futureinterestand costs.}

¶33

In the result,^{the present Original ApplicationNo'01/2025is} allowed as under:^-

¶34

i) The Defendant is^{liable topay tothe} Applicant Bank a sum of^{Rs.22,L4,713'35ps} with future interest @L2.7lo/o^{p.a. simple} from the date of application^{till the date of} realization;

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Issue^{RecoveryCertificate accordingly'}

¶40

1. Communicate {Dictated^{to the steno, a copy to""*"a,''iJn"O of this order to tnd p'ono'nt"d the parties byme in concerned'the opencourt on} itris the rz"^{Day of June, 2025)'}

¶41

.,,o

¶42

.,^.

¶43

(RAMESHWAR^KOTIE] PRESIDING^OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Gorijala Pavan Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Gorijala Pavan Kumar

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. K K Eywear

M/S. Punjab National Bank versus M/S. Umadevi Pharmaceuticals Private Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Kandada Manaiah

State Bank of India versus M/S. Saraswathi Traders

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Sri Gokula Garments

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Moparthy Bhavani