Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Premanand Chary Venkatapuram

DRT28 Nov 2025OA/427/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited for recovery of Rs. 27,46,747/- plus interest and costs against the defendant, who remained absent and ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 27,46,747/- with future interest at 10.75% p.a. simple from date of application; applicant entitled to proceed against defendant's properties and costs.

Icici Bank Limited versus Premanand Chary Venkatapuram — DRT (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

,, IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVENIBER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No:427 OF 2025

¶4

lvl/s. ICICI Bank Limited., Branch Offlce at Gachibowli, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Power of Attorney ....Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Premanand Chary Venkatapuram S/o. Sukhananda Chary Venkatapuram H.No. 12-11-1124/1, Boudhanagar Near Bobby Bakery, Warasiguda Hyderabad - 500061.

¶7

...... Defendant

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. Anil Vydya

¶9

Defendants :Ex-parte

¶10

:: qLLg& ::

¶11

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.27,46,747/- from the defendant with future interest there on @2olo^p.m. compounded monthly from 23.04.2025 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶12

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 12.08.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶13

The Applicant Bank examined K. Raja Yaswanth, Area Relationship Manager as AW-1 and marked 09- gocuments through him as Ex. A.1to Ex. A.oe. ffifir-

¶14

OA.No.427 12025

¶15

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

¶16

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶17

,. Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for

¶18

'. the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶19

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affldavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.09 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is Iiable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶20

In the result, the present Original Application No.427 /2025 is allowed as under: -

¶21

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.27,46,747/- wilh future interest @10.75olo p.a. simple, from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

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

¶23

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶24

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipr or this order.T/$xrf^

¶25

OA.No.427l2025

¶26

i. 9.

¶27

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶28

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶29

(Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 28th day of November, 2025).

¶30

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Premanand Chary Venkatapuram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Premanand Chary Venkatapuram

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

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S. Varaha Constructions