Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

DRT24 Jun 2026OA/1045/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Drugs and Recovery Tribunal allowed bank's original application for recovery of dues. Court confirmed defendants' joint and several liability for the claimed amount, interest, and rights over hypothecated assets after defendants appeared ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.4,46,43,888/- with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets and defendant properties; issue Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Sri Buddha Engineering… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II^{AT HYDEMBAD} DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF ]UNE,²⁰²⁶

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{NO :} 1045 0F 2025

¶4

H DFC Bank Ltd., Havlng its office at Retail^Loan Service Centre, D No. 40 - 304,^{Krlshna Jyostna} Complex, Bhagya Naga r, Kurnool-518002. Rep. by its Authorized Slgnatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sri Buddha Engineering^and Constructions Pvt.^{Ltd., RePbY its} Director, lvl r. Rajasekhar,^{Office at} H.No.87- 1388-N, Sheshadri^Nagar Housing Board Colony,^Nandyal Check Post, Kurnool - 518002.

¶8

Mr. Koditham Rajasekhar, S/o.^Srlnivasulu Aged about 34 Years, Occ:^Business R/o. H. No.87-1388-N, Sheshadri^Nagar Housing Board Colony,^Nandyal Check Post, Kurnool -^518002.

¶9

Mrs. Vannam Sravani, W/o.^Rajasekhar Aged about 31Years, Occ:^Business H.No.87-1388-N, Sheshadri^Nagar Housing Board Colony,^Nandyal Check Post, Kurnool - 518002.

¶10

Mrs. K. Vara Lakshmi, Wo.^{K Srinivasulu} Aged about 57 Years, Occ:^Business H.No.87-1388-N, Sheshadri^Nagar Housing Board Colony,^Nandyal Check Post, Kurnool -^518002.

¶11

... Defendants

¶12

: Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy Counsel for the Applicant Defenda nts : Ex-partefg..,-.$

¶13

oA.NO.104s/2025

¶14

:: ORDER ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.4,46 ,43,888/- from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @18yo^p.a. with^quarterly interests from the date of application till the date of reallzatlon along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶16

Summons served on D1 to 4. They were set ex-parte on 06.01.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Adithya A S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 11 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.11.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. Perused the material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideratlon is:-

¶20

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

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.11 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. ,t\

¶22

oA.NO.1045/2025

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No.1045/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.4,46,43,888/- with future interest @9.5% p.a. simple from the date of applicauon till the date of realization;

¶25

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;

¶26

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

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶28

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

¶29

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶30

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 24th Day of June, 2026).

¶31

ffisru$ (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFF]CER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sri Buddha Engineering and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. M Kondal Reddy

M/s Union Bank of India versus M/s Manidhar Furniture Mall

Bank of Baroda versus Kalamanda Krishna

Canara Bank versus M/s. MD Rafi Boiler Poultry Farm

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Nehemiah

Bank of Baroda versus M/s. Valuva.