Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Vustela Srinivas Reddy

DRT12 Feb 2026OA/19/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal held that the banking applicant established its claim against the defendant defendant via credible witness and documentation. The order allowed the Office Application permitting recovery of the principal, interest, and costs along with issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The Defendant is liable to pay the total sum with interest; the Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of the Defendant; Issue of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Vustela Srinivas… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF FEBRUARY,2026

¶2

PRESENT: SRI GUMMADI GOPICHAND, PRESlDING oFFIGER

¶3

OA. No. 19 OF 2026

¶4

Between :

¶5

State Bank of lndia, Chikkadpally Branch, H.no. 1-8-563/1, RTC Cross Roads Opp. Sandhya Theatre, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 020 Represented by its Asst. Manager Applicant VERSUS Mr. Vustela Srinivas Reddy, S/o. V. AnkiReddy, Aged 29 years, Male, Occ. Private Employee, R/o. H.No. 4-44, Amaravaram Village, Huzurnagar Mandal, Suryapet District, Telangana - 508 204 Defendant Counsel for the parties : For The Applicant Ajgal Ravi Babu For the Defendant Exparte Reserved on 09.02.2026 Pronounced on z.& 12.02.2026 rtr Upload in on .02.2026

¶6

(oA. No. 19/2025)

¶7

ORDER

¶8

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA against Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.25,04,787.00 Ps. (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Four Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty Seven Only) with contractual rate of interest @11.30oh p.a with monthly rests from 06.11.2025 till the date of realization.

¶9

As per the averments in the application, the Applicant Bank states that Defendant availed Personal Loan under Xpress Credit Elite Limit of Rs.25,00,0001 repayable in 72 equated monthly installments of Rs.47,9711 with interest @11.30% p.a with monthly rests and executed Personal Loan Agreement dated 09.11.2023 in favor of the Applicant Bank. After availing the loan facility, the defendant failed to comply the terms of sanction, hence the applicant bank classified the account as NPA on 09.04.2025 and issued Legal Notice dated 28.10.2025 to the defendant. lnspite of several requests and demands, the defendant did not clear the outstanding. Hence this oA.

¶10

¶11

,:'6

¶12

and set exparte on 05.02.2026.

¶13

(oA. No. 19/2025)

¶14

Smt. M Uma Mahesh, Manager of the Applicant Bank examined himself as AW.1 and exhibited relevant documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to A.8.

¶15

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank.

¶16

The point that arise for consideration is whether the Applicant bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant as prayed for?

¶17

Defendant remained exparte. To substantiate the case of the Applicant Bank, AW.1, official of the Applicant Bank was examined and he exhibited relevant documents as Ex.A.1 to A.8. ln view of the above, I hold that the Applicant Bank has established their claim made in the OA against the Defendant and hence the Applicant Bank is entitled to recover the claim made in the OA with future interest and costs.

¶18

ln the result, the present OA is allowed with costs, as under :

¶19

The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.25,04,787.00 Ps. (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Four Hundred and Eighty Seven Only) with @11.30%^{p.a from 06.11 .2025till the} #t" ot

¶20

(oA. No. 1912026)

¶21

L The Applicant Bank is entiiled to proceed against the person

¶22

and properties of Defendant towards realization of the debt

¶23

due.

¶24

That Applicant Bank is entifled to the costs of the OA.

¶25

The Applicant shal fire a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶26

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned.

¶28

(Dictated to the P.A., transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of Feb, 2026)

¶29

sd/-
(c. coPrcHAND)
PRESIDING OFFICER

¶30

TRUD GOPY
t, a 1F/)fi'v

¶31

State Bank of India v. Mr. Vustela Srinivas Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Vustela Srinivas 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

Sri Santosh Kumar Agarwal versus Canara Bank

Vaishnavi Agarwal versus Canara Bank

M S Dinesh Jewelers versus Canara Bank

State Bank of India versus Mr. Swamy Das Reddy Malla

State Bank of India versus Mr. D. Gunasekar

State Bank of India versus Ms. Pilla Lahari Priya