Allowed

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Mohammed Toufeeq

DRT17 Jun 2026OA/164/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Yes Bank Ltd. for recovery of a sum of Rs. 21,66,917.79 with interest against a defendant who appeared ex-parte, holding the claim established by documents on record.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 21,66,917.79 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle, defendant's properties, and costs.

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Mohammed Toufeeq — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF ]UNE, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 164 OF 2026

¶5

The YES Bank Limited office at # 7-8-387,2nd Floor, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.P. Road, Secunderabad - 5OOOO3 Rep by its authorised signatory

¶6

......Appticant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Mohammed Toufeeq s/o. Mohd. shafiuddin

¶9

Aged about 32 years, Occ: Business R/o. H. No.14-8-2lA, Safdar Nagar, Allapur, Borabanda, Hyderabad - 500018

¶10

....Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

¶12

Counsel for the Defendant : Ex-parte

¶13

:: ORDER ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 2t,66,917.79 ps from the sole defendant with future interest @18o/o p.a. with I""',"'ffqa.$e date or nrrins

¶15

oA.NO.164/2026

¶16

the application^{tilt the date of realization along with costs' and} in default,^{sale of OA hypothecated vehicle'}

¶17

Summon^{served on Sole Defendantthroughpaper publication} and was set^{exparte on 15 06'2026 as catled absent and no} representation.

¶18

The Applicant^{Bank examined Ms' D' Shyam KumaraReddy'} Assistant^{VicePresident,as AW-1 and marked 8 documents} through^{him as Ex A l to Ex A S}

¶19

Heard ex-parte^{argumentsfrom the Ld Counsel for the} Applicant^{Bank. Perused the materialplaced on record'}

¶20

The^point that^{arises for considerationis: -}

¶21

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendant^{and OA HY\othecated} Vehicle?

¶22

As^{stated supra, the Defendant remainedex-parteThe} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs'A.1^{to A.8 markedon behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claimof the Applicant Bank againstthe Defendant'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendant is liableto pay the OA claim to} the Applicant^{Bank wlth futureinterestand costs'}

¶23

In the^{result, the present OriginalApplication No 16412026 is} alowed as^{under: -}

¶24

fffisft\

¶25

oA.NO.L64l2026

¶26

i) The Sole Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a Rs. 21,66,817,79 ps with future interest @ 16.01% p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle as described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly,

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶33

(Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th Day of June, 2026).

¶34

(rb^,)s*

¶35

SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Mohammed Toufeeq

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mr. Mohammed Toufeeq

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

State Bank of India versus Dasari Sridhar

Bank of India versus Mrs. Swapna Paila

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Varikuppala Ganesh

M/s. Idbi Bank Limited, versus Smt. Meenakshi Bodanna Chandraiah

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Sri Uday Kiran Sarees and Textiles

M/S Icici Bank Limited versus Vislavath Ravila