Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Rangapuri Uday Kiran

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/498/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited for recovery of dues of Rs. 22,03,967/- plus future interest from a sole defendant who appeared ex-parte. The Tribunal held the defendant liable based on marked evidence.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 22,03,967/- with future interest; applicant entitled to costs and proceed against defendant's properties; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Rangapuri Uday Kiran — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RO DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), f4.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

Original Application No: 498 OF 2025

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited., Gachibowli, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Legal Manager.

¶6

.....Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Rangapuri Uday Kiran S/o. Yadaia h Rangapuri 18-7-297 /86/A, Near Jyothi Saree lv'landir, Sh ivaji Nagar, Uppuguda Falaknuma, Charminar, Hyderabad-SOOO53.

¶9

...... Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant M/s. Anil Vydya

Defendants

Ex-parte

:: oRDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.22,03,967/- from the defendant with future interest @2%^p.m.

¶15

compounded monthly from t7 -05.2025 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶16

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex_parte on 78.07 -2025 as called absent and no representation. The Applicant Bank examined Kalva Raja Yaswanth, Area

¶17

Relationship Manager as AWiL and marked 09 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.os/ru.n|xL'

¶18

¶19

OA.No.498/2025

¶20

4' Heard the Ld. counser for the Appricant Bank and perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶23

6' As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupred with the recitars in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A'09 marked on beharf of the Appricant Bank crinches the craim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liabre to pay the oA craim to the Appricant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.49Bl2025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.22,03,967l- with future interest @10.25olo p.a. simple, from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

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

¶27

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶28

The Applicant Bank is directed to file eost Memo within 2 weeks n

¶29

from the date of , -eceipt of this oftet(fu\b

¶30

oA.No.498/202s

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, conecteJ, iigned and pronorn."J Ly me in the open court on this the 23rd day of September, 2025).

¶33

(RAMESHWAR PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Rangapuri Uday Kiran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Rangapuri Uday Kiran

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

Patan Ayub Khan versus Axis Bank

Mrs. Iris Joseph and Others versus M/s. Shriram Finance Ltd. and others

Union Bank of India versus Sri S. Nadeem Shuieb

State Bank of India versus M/S. E.S. Square Infra Tech

M/S. Yes Bank Limited., versus Mrs. Varthya Shiprah

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Mr. Ponnambalam Chandra Sheker