Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Maya Ladies Corner

DRT10 Dec 2025OA/762/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal heard an original application by Bank of Baroda against homeowners for recovery of a cash credit loan. Defendants were absent. The tribunal relied on evidence to hold defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Ordered payment of principal with future interest, allowed realization against hypothecated assets and person/properties of defendants, and awarded costs.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Maya Ladies Corner — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1OIH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶2

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

¶3

ORTGINAL APPLTCATION No: 762 OF 2025

¶4

BANK OF BARODA

¶5

Adoni Branch, Kurnool District. Rep by its Senior Manager.

¶6

....Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Maya Ladies Corner,

¶9

Prop: Mrs. Anup Kumar Jayanthilal Shah. D.No.15-138, L.B. Street, j"i, i"rp'r"t6.O Adon i Ku rnoo I District, And h ra pilI.n li"rliio r.

¶10

2 Y.r.r. Latha Anup Kumar Shah W/o. Anup Kumar Ja o r,ro r!^_ i:a; # ;?::,,: j:j,'i:fuHil'01.,,^Fe ma,e, Adon i Ku rn oot D istric, And h ra p.illrili"itii

¶11

o r .

¶12

. . . Defendants

¶13

Counsel for the Applicant

¶14

: Mr. Trivikram Chitturu

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

Ihe Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.22,27,516/_ towards Cash Credit Loan from the defendants joinuy and severally with future interest @11.75olo dtro rn l;,,^{jjll,'ilil'::;:'} J,:#:::j,, "ff ;il.I: tif default for sare of hypotheca t d assetQ;#;vrLs

¶19

¶20

oa.No.76212025

¶21

paper publication^They

¶22

1. Summons^{served on D1 and 2 through} called^{absentand no} were^{set ex-Parte on 19 11'2025 as} representation'

¶23

The^{ApplicantBank examined RBharathKumar' Senior} ,"^an"r,^{as AW-1and marked 10 documentsthrough him as} Ex. A.1^{to Ex' A 10'}

¶24

Heard^{the Ld' Counselfor the ApplicantBank Perused the} material Placed^{on record'}

¶25

The^{point that arises for considerationis: -}

¶26

Whether^{the ApplicantBank is entitled'} for the^{claim made in the oA against,} the^{Defendants and OA hYpothecated} assets?

¶27

5.^{As stated supra' the Defendants remained ex-parte The} Evidence^{Affidavit coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz.,^{Exs A'1 to A 10 rn*n"O on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches^{the claim of the nppticant Bank against the D€fendants'} Hence,^{I hold tnat tne oerlnoantsare jointlyand severallv liable} to^{pay the OA claimto ttl" npptituntBankwith futureinterest} and^costs'

¶28

T.Intheresult,thepresentoriginalAppticationNo.T6212025is allowed^{as under: -}

¶29

The^{Defendants are jointly and severally}

¶30

i) u":u:^ot tlaute^{to pai-to the ApPlicant} "u1n towards^{Cash Credit-Loan}

¶31

Rs wittr^{22'27 tuture} '5161-^{interest @)&^.1j..,.0'"} U'"o''-

¶32

oA.NO.752l202s

¶33

from the date^{of application till the date of} realization;

¶34

the OA^{claim issecured bY waY of}

¶35

ii) hypothecation^{of assets describedin the} schedule^{annexed tothe OA and the} applicant^{bank is entitledto proceed against} the same^{to realiseits debt;}

¶36

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

¶37

iv)^{the applicant bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶38

Memo^{within2 weeks}

¶39

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

¶40

Issue^{Recovery Certificate accordingly'}

¶41

10,^{communicatea copv of this order t9^-T:XifJ".'t",t"o[!"Jr1it;,,,} "^ (Dictated to^{the steno' corrected'signed andpronoun(} it i, tn.^{rotn DaY of December' 2025)'} r)w*

¶42

rnkKrsnwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Maya Ladies Corner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S. Maya Ladies Corner

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Akula Vijaya Bhasker

Bank of Baroda versus Mr. Nainar Chandrsekhar

P srinivas reddy versus Axis Bank

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Muli Gangi Reddy

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Chigumalla Mallikarjun

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sunmed Hospital