Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Andabatla Renuka

DRT25 Jul 2025OA/98/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by YES Bank Limited for recovery of Rs. 28,74,276.76 jointly and severally against defendants, with future interest. The court also directed the bank to proceed against the hypothecated vehicle and issue a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly liable to pay Rs. 28,74,276.76 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant properties; recovery certificate to be issued.

M/S. Yes Bank Limited versus Mrs. Andabatla Renuka — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 2sTH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 98 OF 2025

¶5

M/s.YES Bank Limited., Office at 1-B-387, 3'd Floor, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.P.Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Appllcant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.. Mrs. Andabatla Renuka W/o. Mr.Andabatla Karunakar 2-67 /7, Potharam Narmetta Potharam Solipuram, Warangal Telangana - 506367.

¶9

Mr. Andabatla Karunakar S/o.Mr. Andabatla Komuraiah 2-67 /7, Potharam Narmetta Potharam Solipuram, Warangal Telangana - 506367.

¶10

.....Defendants

¶11

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

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.28,74,276.76ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18% p.a. compounded with monthly rests from 73.09.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶16

oA.NO.98/2025

¶17

Summons served^{on D1 and 2' Theywere set ex-parteon} 11.06.2025 as^{called absentand no representation'}

¶18

The Applicant^{Bank examinedSai Pavan Gudivada'Legal} Manager, as AW-l^{and marked 06 documentsthrough him as} Ex. A.1 to Ex.^4.06.

¶19

Ld. Counsel for the^{ApplicantBank reported ordersmay be} passed through merits.^{Perused the materialplaced on record'}

¶20

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

¶21

Whether the Appticant^{Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hypothecated} vehicle?

¶22

As stated^{supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte'The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitals in the documents} viz., Exs. A.1 to A.06^{marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim^{of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} Hence,IholdthattheDefendantsarejointlyandseverallyliable topaytheoAclaimtotheApplicantBankwithfutureinterest and costs.

¶23

In the result,^{the present Original ApplicationNo'98/2025 is} allowed as under:^-

¶24

i) The Defendants are^{jointly and severally} liable to^pay to the^{Applicant Bank a sum of} Rs.28,74,276.76ps with^{future interest} @11.84olo^{p.a, simple from the dateof} apptication tiil the date^of rcdizailoru,).g

¶25

¶26

oA.NO.98/2025

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶32

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 .July, 2025).

¶33

(fu',s* (RAMESHWAR KoTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Andabatla Renuka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Andabatla Renuka

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

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Milligram Laboratories

Central Bank of India versus Lachu Cement Bricks Unit

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Mohammed Tahir

Sri Vijaya Lakshmi versus Union Bank of India

Moru Pushpa versus Union Bank of India

M/S. Canara Bank versus M/S. Mamatha Dairy (Sole Proprietory Firm)