Allowed

M/s. American Express Banking Corp v. Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju

DRT5 May 2026OA/161/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's original application for recovery of Rs.36,99,999.11 along with future interest and costs, holding the Defendant liable after ex-parte proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs.36,99,999.11 + future interest (6% p.a.) + costs; Recovery Certificate issued; authority directed to execute against person/properties.

M/s. American Express Banking Corp versus Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju — DRT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT^HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE OsTH DAY OF MAY, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 161 OF 2025

¶4

M/s. American Express Banking Corp American Express Banking Corp., a Body Corporate Having its Head Office at Tower C, Building No.8, DLF^Phase II Gu rgaon - 122002. Represented by its Authorised^{Representative}

¶5

..Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju, S/o.^{Mr. Ramulu C} Plot No.78, Flat No.18, Gayatri^Nest Cyber Hills, Madhapur,^NearPradeep Constructions,^Hyderabad -^500081.

¶8

Permanent Address:^- Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju S/o. Mr. Ramulu C,5-60/20,^Behind Police Station, Jadcherla,^Mahabubnagar Telangana - 509301.

¶9

...... Defendant

¶10

Counsel for the Applicant^{: Mr. N. B. Sudarshan}

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: CLLLEB_::

The Applicant Bank filed^{the present OA for the recovery of a sum of} Rs.49,99,999.11ps from^{the defendantwith future interest from the}

¶15

date of application till^{the date of realisa.tipnalong} With^costs )\tr<q--l- .ut.! - ,.1"i -

¶16

¶17

OA.No.16V2025

¶18

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 13.08.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined R Suryanarayan Reddy, Senior Analyst as AW-l and marked 07 documents throuoh him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07. rhe appticant bank rited part satisractionflStUti;;lroof' that the defendants have paid a sum of Rs.13 Lakhs.

¶20

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

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendant 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 claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claim Less Rs.13 Lakhs to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.161/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.49,99,999.1lps Less Rs.13,OO,OOO/_ with future interest @6% p.a. simple, frg4n the date of apptication ti the date of reatizatioffi\*

¶26

¶27

OA.No.161/2025

¶28

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant for

¶29

realization of its dues;

¶30

¶31

iii) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the OSrh day of May, 2026).

¶35

!n't

¶36

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. American Express Banking Corp v. Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. American Express Banking Corp v. Mr. Cheekuri Nagaraju

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. K Rajesh

Union Bank of India versus M/S Sri Rama Cotton Ginning Mill

Punjab National Bank versus Vinayaka Bore Wells And Engg Corporation

M/S. Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. C J Enterprises(India) Private Limited

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Kanneganti Praveen Kumar

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Sanathan Transport.