Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Teja Sri Enterprises

DRT22 Jul 2025OA/826/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of a debt of Rs. 28,42,063/- with interest and costs. Finding the defendants liable on the evidence affidavit and documents submitted by the bank, the Tribunal enforced the hypothecated security and authorized the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs.28,42,063/- plus 11% interest; Recovery Certificate issued; hypothecated assets and properties to be realized.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Teja Sri Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 826 OF 2023

¶5

HDFC Bank Ltd., Department For Special Operations H.No.6-3-246 & 6-3-244/ A, 3RD Floor Desk No.0196, Roxana^palladium, Road No.1 Banjara Hills, (Besides Virinchi Hospital), Hyderabad District - 500034. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s, Teja Sri Enterprises., Rep by its Proprietor H.No.4-32-169, Shapurnagar Hyderabad, Telangana - 500055.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

M/s. Teja Sri Enterprises., Rep by its Proprietor H.No.32-154, HAL Colony Gajularamaram Road, Near CMR High School, IDA JeedimeUa Medchal-Malkajgiri, Telangana State-500055.

¶11

Mr. Nalla Laxman S/o. Mr. Nalla Vishnu Murthy Age 43 Years, Occ: Business G-4, Alanki Residency, Near CMR High School, Indira Nagar, Gajularamaram Road Quhubullapur,^{IDA Jeedimetla,} Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana - 500055.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

: M/s. M.V. KINI Counsel for the Applicant

¶14

Defendants : Ex-oarte 1ffi;s''#

oA.NO.826/2023

:: ORDER^::

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.28,42,063/-^{as on 30.09.2023 from the defendants} jointly and severally with future interest @18%^{p'a' from the} date of application^{till the date of realization along with costs} and in default^{for sale of hypothecated assets.}

¶19

Summons served^{on D1 and 2. Theywere set ex-parteon} 27.12.2023 as called absent^{and no representation'}

¶20

The Applicant Bank^{examined Srikanth Sukhavasi,Senior} Manager, as AW-1 and^{marked 20 documentsthrough him as} Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.20.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the Applicant Bank.Perusedthe} material^placed on^record.

¶22

The^point that arises^{for consideration is:-}

¶23

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

¶24

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 ApplicantBank} clinches the claim of the Applicant^{Bank against the Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^jointly and^{severallyliable} to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future^interest and costs. N*

¶25

¶26

oA.NO.826/2023

¶27

In the result, the present Original Application No.g26l2023 is allowed as under: -

¶28

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.28,42,063/- as on 30.09.2023 with future interest @11% p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

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

¶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

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

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 22nd Day of iuly, 2025).

¶35

, \ /n*r. .).--, ,rt ;5
'L'"

¶36

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Teja Sri Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. M/S Teja Sri Enterprises

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus v. Lokesh

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Gore Amarnath Reddy

Ms Tudor Management Consultants Pvt. Ltd. versus Ifci Limited

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Kamal Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus S Jagannath Reddy

M.Raghupathi versus Indian Bank