Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S. Varaha Constructions

DRT28 Nov 2025OA/308/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed Original Application No. 308 of 2025 filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs. 34,13,959.23 p.a. with future interest from M/s. Varaha Constructions and partners. The tribunal held defendants jointly and severally liable and ordered sale of hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 34,13,959.23 p.a. with future interest at 11.060% p.a.; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and other properties; recovery certificate issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S. Varaha Constructions — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28TB DAY OF NOVEI\4BER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 308 OF 2025

¶4

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Having its Branch Office at 6-3-1109/7/P1302, 3rd Floor, Jewel Pavani Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda Hyderabad - 500082. Rep. by its Authorized Slgnatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

I\4/s. Varaha Constructions., Rep by its Partner, Kundarapu Rakesh Office at 2-157, Rompikunta Peddapalli, Karimnagar District-505188.

¶8

lvlr. Kundarapu Rakesh, S/o. !'lallaiah Aged about 30 Years, Occ: Partner of

¶9

M/s. Varaha Constructions

¶10

R/o. H.No.2-95l4, Rompikunta

¶11

Peddapalli, Karimnaqar District - 505188.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-parte

::^qLLE& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.34,13,959.23ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @180/0 p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypotheca ted vehictqY:r*

¶18

oA.NO.308/2025

¶19

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 22.OA,2O25 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Abishek p S, Asst. Manager, as AW-1 and marked 08 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.08.

¶21

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

¶22

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

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

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.08 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 and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No.30g/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.34,13,959.23ps with future interest Ox*

¶27

¶28

oA.NO.308/202s

¶29

@11.060/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

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!

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

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 28th Day of November, 2025).

¶35

,..r*a

¶36

,..r*a ;"lY--.,#

¶37

(B,CI4ESHWAR ' ''l''$'sr- KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S. Varaha Constructions

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/S. Varaha Constructions

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S. Pricon

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Gurudatta Earth Movers

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Abhis Wellness Studios

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Gaddameedi Bharath Goud

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Kasula Karunakar Goud

Icici Bank Limited versus Kolli Madhavi