Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Potharaju Swamy

DRT24 Dec 2025OA/233/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the applicant bank's original application filed by Yes Bank Limited. against three defendants for the recovery of default dues amounting to Rs. 35,84,398.19 along with future interest and costs. The defendants, dismissed on ex-parte basis, were held jointly and severally liable, and the bank was directed to issue a recovery certificate against the person and properties. The court a

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability to pay Rs. 35,84,398.19 with future interest and costs; entitlement to proceed against person, properties, and hypothecated vehicles; direction to file cost memo and issue

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Potharaju Swamy — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TR]BUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 233 OF 2025

¶6

lv1/s.YES Bank Limited., OFfice at 1-8-387,2ND Floor, Agrava nshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S. P. Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. Potharaju Swamy, S/o. Pothuraju Rajaram, Aged about 54 Years Occ: Business, R/o. H. No.2-98 Ambedkar Nagar, Hasanparthy N4andal Warangal District - 506371.

¶10

lvlr. Vengala Sarangapani, S/o. Erragattu Vengala, Aged about 48 Years, Occ: Business R/o. H. No.14-82, Adarshnagar, Hasanparthy Mandal, Warangal District - 506371.

¶11

lvlr. Potlapalli Radhakishan Rao S/o. Ramchander Rao, Aged lvlajor Occ: Business, R/o. H. No.2-6- 12671¹ Srinivas Colony, Bhavan i Naga Warangal District - 506001.

¶12

...Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-Pa rte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery a total} sum of Rs.35,84,398.19ps i.e., a sum of^{Rs.7,54,564.34ps}

',,).L'

oa.No.233l2025

towards A/c.No.CVLo18700685163, a sum of Rs.6,51,755.43ps towards A/c. No. UCV018701019737 and a sum of Rs.2l,7 8,07 8.42ps towards A/c. No.CVLo 18701056566 from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18o/o p.a. compounded with monthly rests from 04.72.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicles.

¶22

Summons served on D2 through paper publication, whereas WS of d1 and 3 not filed hence, right was forfeited and set exparte. They were set ex-parte on 09.10.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Sai pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager, as AW-l and marked 15 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.15.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the material placed on record.

¶25

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicles?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.15 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly /a-and severally liable L-l' /'

¶28

oA.NO.233l2025

¶29

to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.233l202S is allowed as under: -

¶31

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.35,84,398.19ps i.e., the defendants 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.7,54,564.34ps towards A/c. No.cv1018700685163, the 1st defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.6,51,755.43ps towards A/c. No. UCVo18701019737 and the defendants 1 & 3 are^jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.21,78,078.42ps towards A/c. No. CV1018701056566; with future interest @9.25olo^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entitled frvfor the costs. ul

¶35

¶36

oA.NO.233/2025

¶37

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

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶39

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 24th Day of December, 2025).

¶40

AY'-^,,r:-, /2 ;'t>n,-'' (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Potharaju Swamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Potharaju Swamy

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

Diva Beauty Cosetics Rep by Its Prop Mrs Raja Mpeta Kashvi versus Unity Small Finance Bank

Yes Bank versus Chalicheemala Kiran Kumar

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Pittala Diwakar Rao

Canara Bank versus M/S.Micro Cables

Indian Bank versus M/S. Balaji Agri Chem

Canara Bank versus M/S Aqua Polyplast