Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Kore Kumar

DRT24 Mar 2026OA/1055/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debt Recovery Tribunal Hyderabad, the bank sought recovery of Rs.20.52 lakh plus interest and secured by hypothecated assets. Defined as ex-parte, the Tribunal held defendants jointly liable and allowed the application granting recovery and issue of certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants declared jointly liable to pay Rs.20,52,490.85/plus interest; right to proceed against hypothecated assets granted; recovery certificate to be issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Kore Kumar — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{24TH DAY OF MARCH,2026}

¶2

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

¶3

dwts4 ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN^No: F.oF²⁰²⁵

¶4

Kotak Mahindra^{Bank Ltd.,} Having its Branch^{Office at 6-3-1109lLlPl3O2} 3'd Floor, lewel^{Pavani Towers, Rajbhavan} Road, Somajiguda,^Hyderabad -^500082' Rep. by its Authorized^SignatorY.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Kore Kumar,^{S/o. K Ramulu} Aged about^{33 Years, Occ:Business} Rio. H.No.10-121,^{MPUPS,Amangal} ^^^Mandal,^{Amangal,Mahabubnagar-509321'}

¶8

Mrs. Kore^{Kistamma, W/o' K' Laxmaiah} Aged about^{50 Years, Occ: Business} Rio. H.t'lo.r0-121,^{MPUPS,Amangal} ^-^ r"i*Out,^{Amangal,Mahabubnagar-509321'} ... Defendants

¶9

Counsel^{for the APP|icant}

¶10

Defendants

¶11

: Mr. M. Srinivas^ReddY

¶12

: Ex-parte

¶13

:: ORDER::

¶14

The^{ApplicantBank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of^{Rs.20,52,490'85psfrom the defendantsjointly and} severally^{with future interest @18o/o p'a' from the date of} application^{till the date of realization along with costs and in} default^{for sale of hypothecated assetfft$("O'></sup>}

¶15

oA.NO.1055/202s

¶16

¶17

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 20.03.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Abhishek p S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. 4.07.

¶19

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

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated asset?

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.07 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the craim of the Appricant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay the oA craim to the Appricant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No.1055/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) Tne Defendants are joinfly and severally Iiable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.20,52,490.g5ps with future interest ^;\fo,$

¶25

oA.NO.1055/202s

¶26

¶27

@16.660lo^{p.a. simple from the dateof} application till the date of^realization;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured bY^waYof hypothecation of asset described^inthe 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 entitledfor the costs.}

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed^{to file CostMemowithin2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this Order.}

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate^accordingly.

¶33

i0. Communicate a copy^{of this order to the parties concerned'} {Dictated^{to the steno, corrected,signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 24th Day of^March, 2026).

¶34

, ,ir.n ., _ ' r" " (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Kore Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Kore Kumar

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Priyanka Mahajan

Poreddy Malla Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

Mukkera Thirupathi Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

S R Trading Company versus Icici Bank Limited

Asset Reconstruction Company Limited versus Shailesh Kumar Gujjar

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. Capital Protection Private Limited.