Allowed

Idfc First Bank Limited "Now" v. Dnrs Infracon

DRT4 Nov 2025OA/826/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte recovery proceedings, the Debts Recovery Tribunal held the defendant liable to pay the claimed sum along with future interest and costs to the applicant bank absent any defense. The application was allowed in full.

What did the court decide?

In favor of applicant bank to recover Rs. 29,38,015.16 with future interest at 16.35% p.a. simple from date of application till realization; also costs awarded.

Idfc First Bank Limited "Now" versus Dnrs Infracon — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

, IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE O4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 ' PRESENT: SH. RAMESII^11_[OTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

OriginalApptication No: 826 OF 2O2S

¶3

IDFC First Bank Limited ..Now,, :i.]i-"I.^M/: -capitat^{First Limited.,} Door No. 6-3-354, 2nd Floor !^B lowers,^{Near Nagarjuna} Circle uanJara Hills Road No.1. Hyderabad _500034. Rep. by its Legal Manager.

¶4

.....Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

DNRS Infracon., Rep by Narsimha Rao Dommata S/o. Dommata poshalu Aged about 56 years, Occ: Business R/o. Plot No.23Cl2, DNRS Infracon IDA Phase 1, patancheru, TS _ 502319.

¶7

...... Defendant

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. V. Santosh Defendants : Ex-parte

¶9

:: ORDER::

¶10

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.29,38,015.16ps as on 25.06.2025 from the defendant with future interest @24olo p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶11

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex_parte on 29.L0.2025 as called absent and no representatio ^ rKO

¶12

OA.No.826/2025

¶13

TheApplicantBankexaminedAkashGhosh,LegatManagerasAW-r and marked^{11 documentsthrough him as Ex. A'1to Ex' A'11'}

¶14

HeardtheLd.CounselfortheApplicantBankandperusedthe material Placed^{on record}

¶15

¶16

WhethertheApplicantBankisentittedfor: the claim^{made in the OA againstthe} Defendant?

¶17

AsstatedSupra,theDefendantremainedex-parte.TheEvidence Affidavitcoupledwiththerecitalsinthedocumentsviz.,Exs.A.lto A.llmarkedonbehalfoftheApplicantBankclinchestheclaimof theApplicantBankagainsttheDefendant.Hence,Iholdthatthe DefendantisliabletopaytheoAclaimtotheApplicantBankwith future^{interest and costs'}

¶18

In the^{result, the present originalApplication No'826/2025is} allowed^{as under: -}

¶19

i) The^{Defendantis liable to pay to the Appticant Bank a} sum of^{Rs'29,38,015'16pswith future interest} @16.350lop.a.simple,fromthedateofapplicationtill: the date of^realization;

¶20

ii) the applicant^{bank is also entitled to proceedagainst} thepersonandpropertiesofthedefendantfor realization of^{its dues;}

¶21

iii) the appticant^{bank is entitledfor the costs}

¶22

'1...r

i i'.'

OA.No.825/2025

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶29

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 04th day of November,2025).

¶30

PRESIDING OFFICER

Idfc First Bank Limited "Now" v. Dnrs Infracon

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idfc First Bank Limited "Now" v. Dnrs Infracon

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

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S. Shanmukhi Agencies

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Thappita Janaki Raju

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus M/S Global Impex

Union Bank of India versus Mr. K. Ranganna

Icici Bank Limited versus Amba Bhavani Hotels

Canara Bank versus Mr. Sayyed Kausar Basha