Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra

DRT10 Feb 2026OA/182/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by HDFC Bank Ltd. against Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 24,10,059.66 with interest. The claim was established via the applicant's evidence affidavit as the defendant remained in default.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs. 24,10,059.66 with future interest and costs; recovery certificate issued.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE lOTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (HonS,), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 182 OF 2025

¶4

HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its Office at 1-10-60/3, 3.d Floor 34, Suryodaya Complex, Begumpet Hyderabad - 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

,....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra S/o. P. Chandraiah, D. No.1/322 S T Colony, lakkala Cheruvu Gooty Main Road, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh.

¶8

. .. Defendant

¶9

: Mr. Srihari Bathina Counsel for the Applicant Defendant : Ex-pa Ex-pa rte

¶10

: Ex-pa Ex-pa rte

¶11

:: ORDER ::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.24,10,059.66ps towards Loan A/c.No.88348974 from the defendant with future interest @10olo p.a, along with interest @2yo p.m, from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶13

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex-parte on 13.06.2025 as called absent and no reflresentation. I"-'.r'' -ri -

¶14

oA.NO.18212025

¶15

The Applicant Bank examined Aditya A S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 06 documents through her as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.06.

¶16

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank stated orders may be passed on merits. Perused the material placed on record.

¶17

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶18

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

¶19

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz,, Exs.A.1 to A.06 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 costs.

¶20

In the result, the present Original Application No.1g212025 is allowed as under: -

¶21

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.24,10,059.66ps towards Loan A/c.No.BB34B974 with future interest @10o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the ,^{Oa and the} ',:.,,

¶23

oA.NO.1821202s

¶24

applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶25

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants 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 this the 10th Day of February, 2026).

¶30

.,,\,"

¶31

.,-..:\ ^^LtI

¶32

i.., ,,^, .. (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra

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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Capital Protection Force Pvt. Ltd.

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Madur Gas Agency.

M/s. Idbi Bank Limited. versus Mr. Chintakuntla Bhaskar Reddy

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Ambothu Vishnu

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Pradeep Blue Metals.

State Bank of India versus Sri. Kamanoori Venkata Ramana