Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. Sri Hanuman Electrical Engineering Works

DRT15 Dec 2025OA/662/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad allowed the Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for the recovery of debt. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable for the claimed sum, future interest, and costs. The applicant was entitled to proceed against mortgaged properties. Order dated 15/12/2025.

What did the court decide?

Joint and several liability declared for sum of Rs. 66,30,801.79 with future interest. Claim secured by mortgage of properties. Costs awarded.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sri Hanuman Electrical Engineering… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 662 OF 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at # 1-10-60/3 3'd Floor, Suryodaya Complex Begumpet, Secunderabad Mandal Hyderabad - 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Sri Hanuman Electrical Engineering Works., Rep by its Proprietor Mr. Baswaraju Raju Office at 9-37, Near Mallechettu Chowrastha, Siddipet Road, Husnabad Village, Karimnagar District-505467.

¶9

Mr. Baswaraju Raju, S/o. Yellaiah Aged about 48 Years, Occ: Prop of M/s. Sri Hanuman Electrical & Engineering Works, R/o.H.No.9-74, Yellam Bazar Husnabad, Karimnagar District - 505467.

¶10

Mr. Baswaraju Yellaiah, S/o, Mallaiah Aged about 76 Years, Occ: Business R/o. H.No.9-74/7, Yellam Bazar Husnabad, Karimnagar District - 505467. ...Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy Defendants : Ex-parteEx-parte

¶12

: Ex-parteEx-parte

¶13

:: ORDER ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.66,30,801.79ps i.e., a sum of Rs.51,74,456.44ps /M,-'rt

L/" '-"

oA.NO.662/2023

towards A/c. No.83250550,^{asum ofRs.11,14,99250ps} towards A/c.No.8116738^{and a sum of Rs.3,41,352 85ps} towards A/c.No.8116738^{from the defendantsjointlyand} severally with future interest @180/o^{p.a. from the date of} application till the date^{of realizationalongwith costs and in} default for sale of^{OA schedule properties.}

¶19

Summons served on^{D1 to 3. They were set ex-parte on} 10.10.2023 as called^{absentand no representation.}

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined^{SumayaShaik, Legal lvlanager,as} AW-1 and marked 06^{documents through her as Ex A l to Ex'} A.O6 and examined^{AdithyaA S, Legal Manager, as AW-2and} marked 16 documents^{throughher as Ex. A.07 to Ex. A 22'}

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for^{the Applicant Bank.Perused the} material Placed on^record.

¶22

The^point that arises^{for considerationis:-}

¶23

Whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the claim made in the^{OA against} the Defendants and OA^schedule properties?

¶24

As stated supra, the^{Defendants remained ex-parte. The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs. A.1 to A.22^{markedon behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim of^{the Applicant Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the^{Defendantsare jointlyand severallyliable} to^pay the OA claim to^{the ApplicantBank} }Itl\h^{futureinterest} and costs. ,OWr-9

¶25

oa.No.662/2023

¶26

¶27

In the result, the present Original Application No.66212023 is allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.66,30,801.79ps i.e., the defendants 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.51,74,456.44ps towards A/c.No.83250550 & a sum of Rs.11, 14,992.50ps towards A/c.No.8116738 and the defendant No.2 is liable to pay a sum of Rs.3,41,352.85ps towards A/c. No. 8116738; with future interest @12olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to rea lise its debu

¶30

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

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶32

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

¶33

I ss u e Reco ve ry Ce rt i f i ca te u rro- 0i Ol V " tr/y^rg

¶34

oA.NO.652/2023

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

this the 15th Day of December, 2025).

¶38

'ffitog

¶39

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. Sri Hanuman Electrical Engineering Works

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/S. Sri Hanuman Electrical Engineering Works

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

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Suram Dinesh

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Yarlagadda Nagender Rao

Indian Bank versus M/s. Manikya Traders Proprietorship

Icici Bank Limited versus Perupaka Venkatesh

Icici Bank Limited versus M. Vijay Kumar

State Bank of India versus M/S S. R. Chemicals