Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohammed Ismail

DRT25 Jun 2025OA/931/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. for recovery of Rs.35,00,834.97 with interest and costs from the defendant Mohammed Ismail. The defendant was deemed absent, and the Tribunal held the bank's claim secured by hypothecated vehicles and person/properties valid.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs.35,00,834.97 with interest at 14.9970% p.a.; bank allowed to recover dues from hypothecated vehicles and defendant's person/properties; costs awarded.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mohammed Ismail — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL'IIAT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE 25thDAY OF ]UNE, 2025}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB, (HONS.),M'A.} PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶3

ORIGiNAL APPLICATION^{NO: 931 OF 2023}

¶4

HDFC Bank^Ltd., Having its Office^{at 1-10-60/3,} 3'd Floor,^{4A, SuryodayaComPlex,} Begumpet,^{Hyderabad- 500016'} Rep. by its^{Authorized Signatory'}

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mohammed^Ismail, S/o.Mohammed^{Abdul Rub,} Aoe 41 Years,^{Occ: Self EmPloyed,} HlNo. r s-g-z++/^{14, Moin Bagh,} Saidabad,^{HYderabad- 500059'}

¶8

Also at:l.4ohammed^{Ismail, C/o.The Shield GYM} H.No. 18-8-253/C/70,^JamalColonY, Rakshapura,^{RakshaPuramRoad,} Chandrayangutta^{Circle, Hyderaba d- 50 0058'}

¶9

Also at:Mohammed ls-rlail,^H.No.27 I⁷ I^L264, Putta Street,^{Balaji Nagar SPSR} Nellore - 524002.

¶10

... Defendant

¶11

: M/s. M.Srinivas^Reddy Counsel for^{the APP|icant}

¶12

Defend a nt : Ex-parte

¶13

::^{qLLEB ::}

¶14

The Appllcant^{Bank flled the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.35,00,834.97ps^{from the dele-ndant with future} ,/Y$$ ,/. ^<, , / <io''

¶15

¶16

oA.NO.931/2023

¶17

interest 6124o7o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicles.

¶18

Summon sent to sole defendant returned with endorsement unclaimed hence, deemed to be served and was set ex-parte on 24.06.2024 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined Sumaya Shaik, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 05 documents through her as Ex.A.l to Ex.A.05.

¶20

4, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated orders may be passed on merits.^perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated vehicles?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex_parte. The Evidence Amdavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A,05 marked on behatf of the Appticant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA ctaim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

h the result, the present Originat Application No.931/2023 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.35,O0,834.97ps

¶26

oA.NO.931/2023

¶27

¶28

with future lnterest @14.9970 p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of

¶30

hypothecation of vehicles 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 reallzation of its dues;

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certiflcate accordingly.

¶35

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 25r5 DayofJune,2O2S).

¶36

Sy'ue ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohammed Ismail

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mohammed Ismail

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

State Bank of India versus Vishnu Infra Projects

Union Bank of India versus narayana swamy

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S. Sai Surface Coating Technologies

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Mr. Palagulla Shenkar Reddy

Canara Bank versus M/S. Shree Jslv Infra Pvt. Limited

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Bheemji Bhukya