Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Sirigadha Sai Prasad

DRT19 Jun 2026OA/165/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of an Original Application filed by Yes Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues from a sole defendant. The defendant remained absent. The Tribunal held the claim established based on evidence and awarded recovery along with interest over the hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 2,87,727.67 with interest; OA secured by hypothecation of vehicle; Recovery Certificate issued.

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd., versus Mr. Sirigadha Sai Prasad — Arbitration | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF ]UNE, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORiGINAL APPLICATION No: 165 OF 2026

¶5

Nl/S. YES BANK LTD., H.No.1-8-387, 2nd Floor, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S. P. Road, Secunderabad - 500003 Rep: By its Authorized Slgnatory

¶6

.......Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Sirigadha Sai Prasad S/o. Sadguru lvlurthy Aged about 37 years, Occ: Business R/o. Flat No.401, H. No.5-6-501, KCP Symphony Apts, Dwaraka Nagar, Nizamabad - 503001

¶9

Also at: C/o. Sri Sai Gold Chains, H. No. 7-6-187, TRO Chambers Gunj, Nizamabad - 503001

¶10

...... Defendant

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy counset for the Defendant : Ex earte ow_*

¶12

oA.NO.16sl2026

¶13

:: ORDER ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 21,A7,727.67 ps from the sole defendant with future interest @ 78o/o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs, and in default, sale of OA hypothecated vehicle.

¶15

Summon served on Sole Defendant through paper publication and was set exparte on 15.06.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶16

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. D. Shyam Kumar Reddy, Assistant Vice President, as AW-1 and marked 8 documents through them as Ex.A.1to EX.A.B.

¶17

Heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant. perused the material placed on record.

¶18

The point that arises for consideration is: -

¶19

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

¶20

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.8 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 to the Applicant Bank with future interest and cos(..AY/U,\

¶21

oA.NO.165/2026

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.165/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Sole Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a Rs. 2L,8t,727.67 ps with future interest @ 14.01o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶24

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 debq

¶25

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

¶26

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶27

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

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 thisthe leth Davof June' 2025)

¶30

rzflp*o.trrt ((alrEsHWAR korHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Sirigadha Sai Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd., v. Mr. Sirigadha Sai Prasad

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 Doraswamy Mohan Rohit Das

Yes Bank Limited versus Mrs. Voodi Sravani

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd., versus M/s. Fast Dot

Bank of Baroda versus Raj Trading

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Malgi Reddy Govardhan Reddy

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Vijeka Logistics Pvt. Ltd.