Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Shri. K. Bhaskar Reddy

DRT6 Jan 2026OA/177/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debts Recovery Tribunal-II Hyderabad hearing an ex-parte Original Application filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank for recovery. The Presiding Officer cited evidence affixed with documents as sufficient. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable and allowed the application for debt recovery with interest and costs. Recovery certificate issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 21,58,514.52 with future interest; proceeds against mortgaged properties; costs awarded; Recovery Certificate issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Shri. K. Bhaskar Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE O6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 177 OF 2025

¶5

Kotak Mahindra BankLimited., Kondakamarla,ODCheruvuMandal Sri Sathya SaiDistrict,ErstwhileAnantapur District. Rep.by its AuthorizedSignatory. Versus	.....Applicant.
1.Shri.K. BhaskarReddy S/o.K. Bayapa Reddy, Agedabout 61 Years, Occ:Agriculture,Mamillakuntlapalli ODCheruvu Mandal,SriSathya SaiDistrict ErstwhileAnanthapur District, AndhraPradesh.
2.ShriKotha NarapaReddy S/o.K.BayapaReddy,Agedabout 52 Years, Occ:Agriculture,Mamillakuntlapalli ODCheruvuMandal,SriSathya SaiDistrict ErstwhileAnanthapur District, AndhraPradesh.
3.Shri Y. KrishnaReddy AgedMajor,Occ:Agriculture, Mamillakuntlapalli ODCheruvuMandal, Sri Sathya SaiDistrict ErstwhileAnanthapur District, AndhraPradesh.	...Defendant
Counselfor theApplicant :Mr.R.Rajen	draPrasad
Defendants :Ex-parte

¶6

...Defendants

¶7

:: qLLq& ::

¶8

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.21,58,5t4.52ps from the.defendants^jointly and ffi*

¶9

oa.No.t77 /2025

¶10

¶11

severally with future interest @24olo^p.a. compounded monthly from 01.08.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule^properties.

¶12

WS of D1 to 3 was not filed hence, their right was forfeited on 10.09.2025 and DE was not filed hence, their right was forfeited and were set ex-parte on 77.72.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶13

¶14

1. The Applicant Bank examined S S V Gopal Rao, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 13 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.13.

¶15

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

¶16

The^point that arises for consideration is:-

¶17

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule properties?

¶18

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.13 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶19

In the result, the present Original Application No.17712025 is alowed as under: -

¶20

furrth

¶21

oA.NO.17712025

¶22

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.21,58,514.52ps with future lnterest @^{10.45olo p.a.} simple from the date of application tlll the date of realization;

¶23

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to rea lise its debt;

¶24

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

¶25

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶26

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

¶27

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶28

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 this the 06rh Day of January, 2026).

¶29

ffi,'r"l HWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Shri. K. Bhaskar Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Shri. K. Bhaskar Reddy

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

S Nadeem Shuleb versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/S. Laxmi-E-Mobility

Udayagiri Eswaramma versus Karur Vysya Bank

Bank of Baroda versus Prasanna Kumar

Om Sai Developers versus Icici Bank Limited

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Sahastra Agro Traders