Allowed

M/S. Bank of Baroda v. M/s Cure Diagnostics

DRT18 Jun 2026OA/169/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed a debt recovery application filed by Bank of Baroda against four defendants, holding them jointly and severally liable to pay dues and permitting proceedings against hypothecated assets and other properties.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed debt recovery claim; defendants liable to pay Rs. 25,13,205/- with interest; recovery certificate issued; costs awarded.

M/S. Bank of Baroda versus M/s Cure Diagnostics — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE^{18THDAY OF ]UNE, 2026}

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 169 OF 2026}

¶6

lY/s Bank of Baroda, Sa hebnaga^{r Branch} At H. No.5-4-35/^152lNR, Plot No 52, Kamala^Nagar, HP Petrol Pump,^{Hyderabad 500070} Represented by its Chief^Manager

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Cure^Diagnostics Rep by its Partners^{Dr latothvenkanna} And lvls. Azmeera^{Jyothi situated at}

¶10

H. NO.2- 114/1,^{VijaYaPuri Colony,} Chowdariguda^{Village,Na rePallY} Hyderabad-500088

¶11

Dr. latoth Venka^nna S/o Mr. latoth^Chatrunaik Aged about:⁴⁰ Years^Occ: Business R/o H.NO.2-114l1,

¶12

.Vijayapuri^{Colony, Chowdariguda} Village, Na repally^{Hyderabad-500088}

¶13

Ms Azmeera lyothi D/o Mr. Jatoth^Chatrunaik Aged 34 Years^{Occ: Business} Flat No.2o6^{VenkateshwaraArcade,} Mothinagar, MoosaPet,^Medchal Malkajgiri, Telangana-500018

¶14

Also at: Bhikyatha nda, Ow"

¶15

oa.No.169/2026

¶16

Chennaraopet paajhapeta 14andat Warangat-506332

¶17

Ms. Vankdoth Ramadevi W/o Venkanna Jatoth Aged: 42 years Occ: lunior Lecturer H no: 2- 7L4/ 7, Vijayapuri Cotonv. Chowdariguda Villaoe. Narepa y Hyderabai_5o00ss

¶18

Also at: H.NO.5-3-73, NK Naoar. Chunchupalti, ehaOrJdri. Kothagudem District- 5d71 18

¶19

.. ., Defendants

¶20

Counsel for the Applicant

¶21

Mr. M. Srinivas

¶22

Counsel for the Defendants Ex- parte

¶23

:: oRDER ::

¶24

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 25,73,205/_ from Defendants 1 to 4 joinuy and severally with future interest @ 13.90olo p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs, in default, sale of OA hypothecated assets. 2. Summonses served on Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 through paper publication and were set exparte on Af:06.2026 as called absent and no representation OWr"

¶25

oA.NO.169/2026

¶26

The Applicant Bank examined lvls. Saritha Sharma, Chlef M.anager, as AW-1 and marked 16 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.16.

¶27

Heard Learned Counsel for the Appllcant. Perused the material placed on record.

¶28

The point that arises for conslderation is: -

¶29

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assefs2

¶30

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.16 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Appllcant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future lnterest and costs.

¶31

In the result, the^present Orlginal Application No.169/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶32

i) The Defendant Nos. 1 to 4^jointly and severally are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs. 25,13,205/- with future interest @ 9.150/0 simple from the datg of application till the date ot rcalization'//)ry/-\ 122^;'r*uv"

¶33

¶34

oA.NO.169/2026

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

iv) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶38

8' The Appricant Bank is directed to fire cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶39

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and p.norn, thisthel8,iJ.v"iJrL,zors).^*'',AW:H"

¶41

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Bank of Baroda v. M/s Cure Diagnostics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Bank of Baroda v. M/s Cure Diagnostics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Central Bank of India versus M/s. Hint Transformers Pvt. Ltd.

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Mahameed Kaleem

Hdfc Bank versus Anil Kumar

State Bank of India versus Koliki Ranga Swamy

Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Palla Madhava Reddy

State Bank of India versus Doraswamy Mohan Rohit Das