Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Yozee Associates

DRT8 May 2026OA/123/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's recovery application against defaulters in a cash credit loan case ex-parte, holding them jointly liable to pay the principal, interest, and costs, and authorized seizure of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs.29,53,491.44 plus 8.70% simple interest, costs; authorization to realize dues from hypothecated assets and defendants' properties; issuance of recovery certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Yozee Associates — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.]I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE OBTH DAY OF IYAY, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), lvl.A.

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 123 OF 2026

¶6

Union Bank of India., KPHB, 9th Phase Branch, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory. .....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Yozee Associates., Rep by its Sole Prop. Mr.Chinnavankela Naga Raveendra Reddy, S/o. Nagi Reddy, R/s. Flat No. Bo 13 B Block Indu Fortune Fields the Annexe, 13th Phase KPHB Colony, Kukatpally. Hyderabad Telangana - 500085.

¶9

Also at:-

¶10

M/s. Yozee Associates., Rep by its Sole Prop. Mr.Chinnavankela Naga Raveendra Reddy, S/o. Nagi Reddy R/s. Flat No.31206, Indhu Fortune Fields Gardenia, KPHB 13 Phase, Kukatpally - 500085.

¶11

Mr. Chinnavankela Naga Raveendra Reddy, s/o. Nagi Reddy, Age 44 Years Occ: Business, R/s. Flat No.31206, Indhu Fortune Fields Gardenia, KPHB 13 Phase Kukatpally - 500085. ...Defendants

¶12

: Mr. K. Murali Babu Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

:: qLLLL ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.29,53 ,49t.44ps towards Cash Credit Loan from the Nn*o

¶16

¶17

oA.NO.12312026

¶18

defendants^jointly and severally with future interest from the date of application till the date of realization atong with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated assets.

¶19

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set exparte on 06.05.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined V Kiran Kumar, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 17 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.17.

¶21

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

¶22

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assetsT

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.17 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.123l2026 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of ow,*

¶27

oA.NO.t23/2026

¶28

¶29

Rs.29,53,491.44ps towards Cash Credit Loan with future interest @8.70olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

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;

¶31

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization 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 Certificate 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 08rh Day ofMay,2O26).

¶36

/Mou*\

¶37

I l./ n"

¶38

(RAIq€sHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Yozee Associates

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Yozee Associates

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 Mr. Shyam Ileni

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Kothapalli Chand Pasha

State Bank of India versus Mr. Lavudiya Jagmal

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd. versus M/s. Karthikeya Jewelers.

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Shri Shakthi Engineering

Idfc First Bank Ltd. Now versus Sistla Krishna