Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/s. Manikya Traders Proprietorship

DRT12 Dec 2025OA/671/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's original application for money recovery. Defaulting defendants remained ex parte. Upon examining the record, the Tribunal held the defendants liable to pay the claim amount with future interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 24,73,587/- with future interest @11.85% p.a. simple, plus costs and execution proceedings.

Indian Bank versus M/s. Manikya Traders… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 12rH DAY OF December, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No: 671 OF 2025

¶5

Indian Bank, Uppal Branch, H; No 2-1-32, Saraswathi Nagar, Nagole Road, Uppal Post & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana-500039, Rep. by its Branch Manager. ...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Manikya Traders Proprietorship,

¶8

Rep. by its Proprietor Mrs. Swapna Manikya,

¶9

Office: H. No. 11-12-5l1, Road No.1, Ramakrishna Puram, Kothapet, Saroornagar Mandal, Telangana-500035.

¶10

Mrs. Swapna Manikya W/o Manikya Sunil Kumar R/o. Flat No. 202, SPS Castle, Alkapuri Colony, Besides Axis Bank, Occ: Trader in Raw Rice, Aged'. 42 years, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist-500102 ... Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. B. Siva Kumar

¶12

Defendant : Ex-parte

¶13

:: ORDER ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.24,73,587/- ftom the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @11.85o/o p.a. compounded with monthly rests from

¶15

oA.No.671l202s

¶16

Paper Publication was filed for D1 and D2. They were called absent no representation and set ex-parte on 15.10.2025.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Mrs. Sarumishta Sahu,^Branch Manager as AW-1 and marked 20 documents through him as^Ex. A. 1 to Ex. A.20.

¶18

Due to non representation of applicant their right of arguments was forfeited and posted for orders. Perused the material^placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

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

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.20 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.671l2025 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendants are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 24,73,5871- with future interest @11.85o/o p.a. simple, from the date o,f application till the date of realization; O%"t-

¶24

OA.No.671l2025

¶25

¶26

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^{proceedagainst} the person and properties of the defendants^for

¶27

rea lization of its dues;

¶28

iii) the applicant bank is entitled^{for the costs.}

¶29

The Applicant Bank is directed to file^{CostMemo within 2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the paftiesconcerned.} (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected,^{signedand pronouncedbymein the} open court on this the^{12thday of December, 2025).}

¶32

PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Bank v. M/s. Manikya Traders Proprietorship

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/s. Manikya Traders Proprietorship

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 Karur Vysya Bank Limited versus M/S. Vaibhav Textiles and Readymades

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Moparthy Constructions

M/S. Canara Bank versus Smt. Chalama Lakshmi Devi

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri Vadde Harish, S/O Saraiah Vadde

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Tanniru Bala Ashok

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Nadamuri Anil Kumar