Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt. Samarla Anusha

DRT11 Jun 2025OA/365/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 35,43,761 from the defendant based on a term loan, noting the defendant remained ex-parte. The claim was secured by hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs. 35,43,761 with future interest @14.50% p.a. Applicant entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets, properties, and costs.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Smt. Samarla Anusha — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLTCATTON No: 365 OF 2024

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra., Branch Office at Shop No.1, Ground Floor, Minerva Complex, MG Road, Secunderabad-500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Smt. Samarla Anusha, W/o.Mekala Ravinder, Age about 34 Years, Occ: Business, H.No.3-3, Valigonda,^yadadri, Telangana.

¶8

... Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.T.S.Sagar Krishna DeFendant : Ex-parteEx-parte

¶10

: Ex-parteEx-parte

¶11

:: ORDER ::

¶12

The Appiicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.35,43,761l- under Term Loan A/c.No.60363958587 from the defendant with future interest @14.5olo p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale oF hypothecated assets.

¶13

2, Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 10.0)32025 as called absent and no representation. '-..*rt;'

¶14

oA.NO.365/2024

¶15

The Applicant Bank examined^{VasanthKumar, Chief f4anager,} as AW-1 and^{marked15 documentsthrough him as Ex.A.1to} Ex.A. 15.

¶16

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant^{Bankstated orders may be passed} on merits. Perused the^{materialplaced on record.}

¶17

The point that arises for consideration^is:-

¶18

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated assets2

¶19

As stated supra, the Defendant 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 Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶20

In the result, the present Original Application No.365/2024 is allowed as under:^-

¶21

i) The Defenda nt iS liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.35,43,761lunder Term Loan A/c. No.60363958587 with future interest @10.20olo p.a. sim'ple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

il) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the x6.f

¶23

oA.NO.365/2024

¶24

applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶25

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

¶26

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶27

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

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 1lth Day ofJune, 2025).

¶30

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt. Samarla Anusha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Smt. Samarla Anusha

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sr Enterprises

Ms Agarwal Steels versus City Union Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. K. Veeranna

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Siripurapu Venkat Karthik Varma

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Heeralal Nayak Pathlavath

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Uday Kumar Reddy Arava