Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda

DRT15 Sept 2025OA/680/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues totaling Rs. 35,49,398.73 from the respondents. The court held the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the principal amount with future interest and costs, secured by way of mortgage of schedule property, and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 35,49,398.73 with future interest and costs; OA claim secured by mortgage; Recovery Certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 680 OF 2022

¶5

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

¶6

..... Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda, s/o.subba Naidu, Aged about 40 Years Occ: Prop of M/s.Havisha Medi Enterprises 3-31, Hanuman Nagar, Gaddiannaram Hyderabad - 500060.

¶9

Also at:Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda C/o.H.No.3-27, Chaitanyapuri Colony Kothapet, Dilsuknagar, Hyderabad-500060.

¶10

Also at:Mr. Naga raj Kota konda D.No.1-1-169/1 to 174, Shop No.1 Ground Floor, Beslde Unlimited Shopping lYall, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad - 500020.

¶11

Mrs.A.Anusha Rani, W/o. Nagaraj Aged Major, Occ: Housewife R/o. H. No.13-3-31, Ground Floor Hanuman Nagar, Hyderabad - 500060.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s.14.Srinivas Reddy

¶14

Defendants : Ex-parte

Arng_.r_.e

oa.No.680/2022

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.35,49,398.73ps i.e., a sum of Rs.31,63,605.91ps towards A/c. Nos.50200030232982 & 8119669 and a sum of Rs.3,85,792.82ps towards A/c.Nos.58031581 & 0001011740000878849 from the defendants joinUy and severally with future interest @18o/o p.a. from the date oF application tlll the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶20

WS was not filed hence, right was forfeited on 27 .09.2023 and counsel for D1 & 2 reported no instructions. They were set exparte on 05.12.2023 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examtned Sumaya Shaik, Legal N4anager, as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07 .

¶22

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

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

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

¶25

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.07 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are ioinly and severallv liable OV*'"

¶26

oA.NO.580/2022

¶27

to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶28

No.680/2022 is In the result, the present Original Application allowed as under: -

¶29

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally llable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.35,49,398.73ps i.e., the defendants 1 & 2 are^jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.31,63,605.91ps towards A/c.Nos.5020003 0232982 & 8119669 and the 1st defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.3,85,792.82ps towards A/c. Nos. 58031581 & 0001011740000878849; with future interest @10.6V0 p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

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;

¶31

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

¶32

iv) the appricant bank is entiUlEtp"e.lgits.

¶33

oA.NO.680/2022

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

9, Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

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 15ih Day of September, 2025).

¶38

/An'r<*tsfi /^{(,/, -t5..} ldrdesnwen^xornry PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Nagaraj Kotakonda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Harini Trading Company

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus M/S. Pranav Sai Agencies

M/S. Uco Bank versus Tarakarama Educational Society

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Sri Laxmi Agency

Canara Bank versus Maddipatla Somasekhar Naidu

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Krishna Marketing