Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. N v S Sudheer Kolluru

DRT4 Dec 2025OA/567/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank for recovery of Rs. 49,36,830/- along with interest and costs against two respondents who remained ex-parte, directing the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Grant of recovery of Rs. 49,36,830/- plus future interest and costs; issuance of Recovery Certificate; direction to file cost memo.

Canara Bank versus Sri. N v S Sudheer Kolluru — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE O4TH DAY OF DECEMBER,²⁰²⁵ PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.COM.,^{L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

	ORIGINAL APPLICATIONNo:567^OF2025
Cana Kund Grenl Rep.	raBank., anbagh Branchat 6-3-866/2 ands,Begumept,Hyderabad-^500016. by its AuthorizedSignatory. '....Applicant.
	Versus
1.	SriN.V.S.Sudheer Kolluru S/o.Sri. VenkataratnamKolluru H.No.6-95-1,HudaColony,Chanda Nagar,Serilingampally,KVRanag Reddy Hyderabad-500050,Telangana.
	Alsoat:- FlatNo.B-106FirstFloor,Block-B Beccun LifeStyle, Sy.No.105/4 Kompally VillageandMunicipality Dundigal-GandimaisammaMandal Medchal-Malkajgiri District-500043.
2.	M/s.beccunInfrastructuresLimited., RepbyitsManagingDirector Sri.Prahanth KumarPur,Regd.Office At102,Model House, Punjagutaa Hyderabad-500082. ...Defendants
	Counselfor theAppllcant :M/s.Chavan& Associates
	Defendants :Ex-parte
	::Q-LELE&::
1.	TheApplicantBankfiled the^presentOAfortherecoveryatotal sumofRs.49,36,830/-ason 28.05.2025 towardsHousingLoan /$ea..'1, ,J'-n"

¶3

¶4

oA.NO.557l2025

¶5

A/c. No.16000253 4624 frcm the defendants joinfly and severally with future interest @10.6590 p.a. compounded with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶6

Summons served on D1 through paper publication, whereas summons sent to D2 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex-parte on 23.09.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶7

The Applicant Bank examined Vankudoth Raju, Legal t4anager, as AW-1 and marked 15 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A,15.

¶8

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

¶9

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶10

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶11

As stated supra, the Defendants 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 Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest /X*nn-,'.e1 and costs. ////-,t! (-)/

¶12

oA.NO.s57l2025

¶13

In the result, the present Original Application No.56712025 is allowed as under: -

¶14

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.49,36,830/- towards Housing Loan A/c.No.160002534624 with future interest @11.40olo^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶15

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶16

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

¶17

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the^costs.

¶18

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo^{within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶19

¶20

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶21

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 04ih Day of December, 2025).

¶22

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri. N v S Sudheer Kolluru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. N v S Sudheer Kolluru

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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/S. Rainbow Filling Station

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Bogmallo Enterprises Private Limited

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Ms. Antarvedi Tejaswini

Icici Bank Limited versus Bommepalle Jayarami Reddy

Csb Bank Limited versus Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Canara Bank versus M/S. Matrix Lab Tech