Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport

DRT17 Apr 2026OA/132/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I at Hyderabad allowed an original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against five respondents, holding them liable to repay Rs.1.05 Crore with interest and costs based on ex-parte evidence where respondents did not appear.

What did the court decide?

Directed Defendants to pay Rs.1,05,00,748.80 with interest; authorized realization against Schedule-A and scheduled assets; allowed costs.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF APRIL, 2A26

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 132 OF 2A26

¶4

HDFC BanK Ltd. Retail Loan Service Centre # L/725, 1st Floor, Opp: Manasa Inn, Dwaraka Nagar, R S Road, Nagarajupalli, Cuddapah - 516001 Rep by its authorised signatory

¶5

.....Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport Represented by its Managing Partner, K Venkata Subba Reddy, # 7/1L2, Opp: RTIP Colony Gate, V V Reddy Nagar, Yerraguntla, Kadapa District - 516312

¶8

Mr K Venkata Subba Reddy S/o. Chinna Chenchi Reddy Aged about 54 years, Occ: Business & Managing Partner of M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport R/o. H. No. 7/LLz, Opp: RTTP Colony Gate, V V Reddy Nagar, Yerraguntla, Kadapa District - 516312

¶9

Mr. K Venkata Krishna Reddy S/o. Chinna Chenchi Reddy

¶10

Aged: 43 years, Occ: Business Partner of M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport R/o. H. No. 7ltL1, Opp: RTTP Colony Gate, V V Reddy Nagar, Yerraguntla, Kadapa District - 516312

¶11

Mr. Katha Rosi Reddy S/o.Chenna Reddy Aged about 54 years, Occ: Business Partner of M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport R/o. D. No.2/9, Near Chennakes4laswami Temple, i/Td''u

¶12

oA.NO.132/2026

¶13

Alluru Village, UYYalavada^Mandal, Kurnool District - 518134

¶14

Mr. Y Nagi Reddy^{S/o. Y SubbaReddy} Aged: BB^years, Occ:^Business R/o. D. No.7lL26,^{KrishnaNagar,} Kalamalla Village,^{YerraguntlaMandal,} Kadapa Districf - 516312

¶15

....Defendants

¶16

: Mr. Srinivas Reddy Counsel for the Applicant

¶17

Counsel for the Defendants^{: Ex-parte}

¶18

:: ORDER ::

¶19

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.1,05,00,748.8t^{ps with future interest @18o/ofrom} the date of filling the^{applicant till the date of realizationalong} with costs, and in default,^{sale of O.A. Schedulemoveable and} i m moveable assets/ProPefties.

¶20

Summon served on Defendant^{Nos. 1 to 5 and were set expafte} on 15.04.2A26 as called^{absentand no representation.}

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined^{Ms. AdithyaA.S, LegalManager,} as AW-1 and marked 43^{documentsthroughhim as Ex.A.1 to} Ex.A.43.

¶22

Heard ex-pafte arguments from^{the learned counsel for the} applicant. Perused the material^{placed on record.}

¶23

¶24

s. rhe Point that arises ,1',**

¶25

oA.NO.13212025

¶26

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and O.A. Schedute moveable and immoveable assets/properties?

¶27

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-pafte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.43 marked on beharf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are riabre to pay the oA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶28

In the result, the present original Application No.L32/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶29

i) The Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 joinUy and severally are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs.1,05,00,748.8L ps with future interest @13olo simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of Schedule-A properties and hypothecation of Schedule-B assets, as described in the schedule annexed to the OA and applicant bank is entitled to proceed aqainst the same for realisation ,r auurfu.tt

¶31

oA.NO.132l2026

¶32

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank^{is entitledfor the costs'}

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery Certifi cate^{accordi ngly.}

¶37

Communicate a copy^{of this order to the parties concerned.}

¶38

(Dictated to the steno, .orr..t.d, signed^{and pronounced by me in the open court on} iii',t"izdo.yof April,2026l. ffu$r^.ttS (RAD*dSHWAR KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Sree Sada Siva Transport

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

The Yes Bank Limited. versus Mr. Danne Jangaiah

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Siri Business and Infra(Sbi-Hyderabad)

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Gayathri Minerals

Idfc First Bank Ltd. Now versus Imagix Pyrolysis Plant

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Pagidi Jayamma

Repalle Salamma versus Sri Ram Finance Ltd.