Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sujata Padala

DRT23 Jul 2025OA/441/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against two defendants for recovery of Rs. 26,50,015.75 along with interest and costs, holding them jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 26,50,015.75 with interest @9.25% & 10.43% p.a.; OA claim secured by hypothecated vehicle; bank entitled to proceed against vehicle and defendants' properties; costs fix

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sujata Padala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RD^{DAY OF ]ULY, 2025}

¶3

PRESENT: SH.^{RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM., L.LB.(HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFlCER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{NO: 441 OF 2023}

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at #^1-10-60/3, 3'd Floor, 3A, Suryodaya^ComPlex, Begumpet, Hyderabad^- 500016. nep. Oy its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.'...Applicant'

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sujata Padala, S/o.Neeru^{Kanti Muttaiah} Occ: Business, Age 34^Years R/o. H.No. 8-5-283/207, champapet Barlamguda, Road No.7,^Karmanghat Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶9

Pavdala langaiah, S/o. Pavdala Sailu Age 40 Years, Occ: Business R/o. H.No. 8-5-2831207 , Champapet Barlamguda, Road No.7, Karmanghat Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶10

...Defendants

¶11

: M/s. Srihari Bathina Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: qLLL& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.26,50,015.75ps towards Loan A/c.No.8751561 & 84282828 from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @9.2570 & 10.43% p.a. along 2o/o p.m. interest from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in defautt for sale of hypotheca ted vehicttq*X)'p

¶16

oA.NO.441l2023

¶17

Summons served on D1 and 2 through^{paper publication.} They were set ex-parte on 26.L2.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Sumaya Shaik, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 05 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.05.

¶19

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed through merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

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

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants^{remained ex-parte. The} Evidence Affidavit coupled with the^{recitals in the documents} viz., Exs. A,1 to A.05^marked on^{behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim of the^{Applicant Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants^{are jointlyand severallyliable} to pay the OA claim to the^{Applicant Bank with futureinterest} and costs.

¶23

In the result, the^{present Original Application No'44L/2023is} allowed as under:^-

¶24

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.26,50,015'75ps towards^{Loan A/c' No'} 87s1s61 & 84282828 *frffiT{r.'""

¶25

oA.NO.447/2023

¶26

@9.25olo^{p'a' simple from the date of} application^{till the date of realization;}

¶27

ii) the^{OA claim issecured bY waY of} hypothecation^{of vehicle described in the} schedule^{annexed tothe OA and the} applicant^{bank is entitledto proceedagainst} the^{sameto realise its debt;}

¶28

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

¶29

iv)^{the applicantbank is entitledfor the costs'} The^{Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within2 weeks} B. or^{receiPt or this order'} ;:;;;;"te

¶30

o Issue^{Recovery Certificate accordingly'}

¶31

o'; u ,,^o "

¶32

1. co^{m m u n i cate} : ^.?3,Y" :,: i:';;:i:^{: ::" :I',""'fffJ ?'" :: ff""#} - . .-.o..",..-,

¶33

i?ffi:9,i:I;:i,,r,,,0,'t

¶34

'}ls,',!$sLt?lgi

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sujata Padala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Sujata Padala

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Kamal Enterprises

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Teja Sri Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus S Jagannath Reddy

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr. Vds Prakasa Rao Palepu

Smt Gulab Saraf versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd.

shilpa agarwal versus Indusind Bank Limited