Allowed

Yes Bank v. Royal General Contractors Private Limited

DRT25 Aug 2025OA/96/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs.44.76 lakh with interest from the corporate defendant and its director, jointly and severally liable for the debt.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.44.76 lakh with interest and costs; bank entitled to realize debt from hypothecated assets and defendants' properties.

Yes Bank versus Royal General Contractors Private Limited — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT^HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST,²⁰²⁵

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 96 OF 2025

¶5

M/s. YES Bank Ltd., 2nd Floor, H.No.1-8-387 Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane S.P Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Royal General Contractors Private Limited., Rep by its Managing Director, Mr.Shaik Hussain Saheb 2nd Floor, H.No.5-9-22l4/C, Hill Fort Road No.4, Adharsh Nagar Hyderabad, Telangana - 500063.

¶9

Mr.Shaik Hussain Saheb

¶10

Director of M/s.Royal General Contractors Private Limited., 4-93/3 Remidicharla Yerrupalem, Remidicharla, Khammam Telangana - 507201.

¶11

.,.Defendants

¶12

: M/s.N,B.Sudarshan Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.44,76,845.02ps from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @180/o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in defautt for sale of hypothecarca asserc.fiYxg.-ss'

¶17

oA.NO.96/202s

¶18

¶19

Summons served on D1 through paper publication, whereas summons served on D2. They were set ex-parte on 25.06.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Sai Pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶21

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. Perused the materia I 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 assets2

¶24

As stated supra, the DeFendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.l 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 jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No.96/2025 is allowed as under:^-

¶26

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.44,76,845.02ps with future interest @8.75olo^p.a. simple from the date of apptication tiil the date ot reatizatioffuig

¶27

oA.NO.95/202s

¶28

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 entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

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 25th Day of August, 2025).

¶34

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDlNG OFFICER

Yes Bank v. Royal General Contractors Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. Royal General Contractors Private Limited

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

Sri vijaykumar versus Bank of Maharashtra

Ski Metal Craft versus Bajaj Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus M/S. K.S. Care Hospital

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Swathi Dental Manufacturer

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mohammadmahdi Kelidari

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Padmavathi Industry