Allowed

State Bank of India v. Ms. Bonam Sai Keerthi

DRT28 Apr 2026OA/197/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank for the recovery of dues from a defendant who remained absent. The defendant was held liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs.21,22,081/- with future interest; defendant's person and properties liable for realization; costs awarded to applicant.

State Bank of India versus Ms. Bonam Sai Keerthi — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-]I AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No: 197 OF 2026

¶4

State Bank of India., Padmarao Nagar Branch, Postbag No.2 Secunderabad - 500023. Rep. by its Asst. Manager. .....Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Ms. Bonam Sai Keerthi, D/o. Bonam Venkata Rathnam, Aged about 27 Years Female, Occ: Private Employee R/o. H.No. 2-2-785/24/1, Ma llikarjuna Na9ar, Amberpet, Hyderabad, Telangana-500013.

¶7

Defendant

¶8

Counsel for the Applicant : I4r. Ajgal Ravi Babu Defendants : Ex-parte

¶9

:: 9-LD-L& ::

¶10

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.27,22,087/- towards Xpress Credit Elite Loan A/c. No. 4260467 6902 from the defendant with future interest @11.90o/o p.a. with monthly rests from 06.12.2025 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶11

Summon served on sole defendant and was set ex-parte on 27.04.2026 as caled absent and no representationfiff:N

¶12

¶13

OA.No.197/2025

¶14

The Applicant Bank examined SD Vamsi Krishna, Legal Manager as AW-1 and marked 09 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.09.

¶15

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

¶16

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶17

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

¶18

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.09 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.

¶19

In the result, the present Original Application No.197l2026 is allowed as under: -

¶20

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.21,22,081/- towards Xpress Credit Elite Loan A/c. No. 42604676902 with future interest @11.90o/o p.a. simple, from the date of application tilt the date of realization;

¶21

ii) the applicant bank is also entiued to proceed against the person and properties of the defendant for reatization of its dues; /fu"*

¶22

OA.No.19712026

¶23

¶24

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶25

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

¶26

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶27

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 28ti day of April, 2026).

¶28

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Ms. Bonam Sai Keerthi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Ms. Bonam Sai Keerthi

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

The Yes Bank Limited versus M/s. Sai Manikanta Infra Projects.

Karre Radha versus LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Naresh Banothu

Punjab National Bank versus Mr Laxminarayana Narasimulu Palakurki

Union Bank of India versus Amma Petroleum Company.

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Manopadu Swamy