Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Kannegoni Dhanaiah

DRT20 Nov 2025OA/269/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte original application, the Tribunal held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the applicant bank Rs. 27,09,346.64 with future interest. The court enforced recovery via hypothecated vehicle and other properties. A recovery certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 27,09,346.64 with future interest; hypothecated vehicle seized for realization; recovery certificate issued.

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Kannegoni Dhanaiah — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TR]BUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 2OTH DAY OF NOVEIYBER, 2025

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB.^(Hons.), 14.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 269 OF 2025

¶4

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.

¶5

..... Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Kannegoni Dhanaiah S/o. K. Chennaiah, Aged about 29 Years, Occ: Business

¶8

R/o. H.No.8-232, Ramakrishnapuram Mudigonda, M un ugodu, Nalagonda-508244.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

Plot No.147, Lecturers Colony Hayath Nagar, Hyderabad - 501505.

¶11

Mr. Kannegoni Chennaiah, S/o.K.Veeraiah Aged about 65 Years, Occ: Business R/o. H.No.8-232, Ra ma krish na pura m Mudigonda, Munugodu, Na lagonda- 508244.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. f4. Srinivas Reddy

Defenda nts

:Ex-parte

:: qLLLL ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.27,09 ,346.64ps from the defendants jointly and severatty with future interest @18o/o e."ffi:lz.zOza tt

¶18

¶19

oa.No.26912025

¶20

the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶21

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set ex-parte on 09.O7.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶22

3, The Applicant Bank examined Sai Pavan Gud ivada, Legal

¶23

l,lanager, as AW- 1 and marked 07 documents through him as

¶24

Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶25

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

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

Whether the Appticant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypoth;caad vehicle?

¶28

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit 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 joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the present Original Application No.26912025 is allowed as under: -

¶30

i) The Defendants are Joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicanllank a sum of ffirr*u

¶31

oA.NO.269l202s

¶32

Rs.27 ,09,346.64ps with future interest @9.25o/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 deb|

¶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 entiiled for the costs.

¶36

B. 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, co,ected, signed and pronounced by me in the open lourt on this the 2Oh Day of November, 2025).

¶39

/M,@ (Mh-ESHWAR KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Kannegoni Dhanaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Kannegoni Dhanaiah

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

Canara Bank versus Mr. Vedantham M. Vishnu Charan

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Md. Zain Uddin

State Bank of India versus M/S. Mdh Motors Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Sriveda Educational Society

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kakarla Divakar Naidu

State Bank of India versus Smt. Muntimadugu Savitri