Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Limited., v. Mrs. Varthya Shiprah

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/231/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's application for recovery of Rs.36,75,899.81 from the joint borrowers. The defendants were absent. The Bank recovered the sum from the hypothecated vehicle and was granted costs.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 36,75,899.81 with future interest; sale of hypothecated vehicle; recovery from person and properties; costs.

M/S. Yes Bank Limited., versus Mrs. Varthya Shiprah — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 231 OF 2025

¶6

M/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.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mrs. Varthya Shiprah, Wo.V.Sakru Aged about 25 Years, Occ: Self Employed, R/o.H.No.5-58, Gangupally Thanda, Pudur, Gangupalle Ranga Reddy - 501101.

¶10

Mr. Varthya Sakru, S/o.V.Ramulu Aged about 32 Years, Occ: Business R/o.H.No.5-58, Gangupally Thanda Pudur, Gangupalle, Ranga Reddy - 501101.

¶11

Mr, Varthya Rahul Naik, S/o.Ramulu Naik Aged about 32 Years, Occ: Business R/o.H.No.5-58, Gangupally Thanda Pudur, Gangupalle, Ranga Reddy - 501101.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.M.Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: CLLLE& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total '

¶18

sum of Rs.36,75,899.81ps from the defendants iointly and 6fu,txt''

¶19

oA.NO.2311202s

¶20

¶21

severally with future interest @18o/o^p.a. compounded^with monthly rests frcm 03.12.2024 till the date of^{realizationalong} with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated^vehicle.

¶22

Summons served on D1 to 3. They were set^{ex-parte on} 13.06.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Sai Pavan Gudivada,^Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 06 documents through^himas Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.06.

¶24

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

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

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

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte.^The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.06 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^{severallyliable} to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future^interest and costs.

¶28

In the result, the^present Original^{Application No.231/2025is} allowed as under:^-

¶29

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of AW"r

¶30

oa.No.231l202s

¶31

¶32

Rs.36,75,899.81ps with future interest @9.50o/o^p.a. simple^{from the date of} application till the date of realization;

¶33

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 entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶34

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

¶35

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

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 23'd Day of September,^2025).

¶39

Lvt9) r*(6r,ffo^*orr.r PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Limited., v. Mrs. Varthya Shiprah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Limited., v. Mrs. Varthya Shiprah

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

Patan Ayub Khan versus Axis Bank

Mrs. Iris Joseph and Others versus M/s. Shriram Finance Ltd. and others

Union Bank of India versus Sri S. Nadeem Shuieb

State Bank of India versus M/S. E.S. Square Infra Tech

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Mr. Ponnambalam Chandra Sheker

State Bank of India versus M/S. D Shabeena (Firm)