Allowed

State Bank of India v. Koliki Ranga Swamy

DRT18 Jun 2026OA/226/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Hyderabad, the court granted an ad-interim relief in an original application filed by an SBI branch to recover dues from an ex-parte defendant. The court found the evidence sufficient to establish liability and authorized the issuance of a recovery certificate for the principal and future interest.

What did the court decide?

The defendant is liable to pay the applicant bank Rs. 23,01,388/- with future interest at 11.55% p.a.; applicant to obtain recovery certificate; costs awarded.

State Bank of India versus Koliki Ranga Swamy — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II^{AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF^{]UNE, 2026}

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 226^{OF 2026}

¶4

State Bank of India, Kushaiguda Branch, ECIL X Road, Kushalguda, Medchal- 14alkajgiri, Rep. by its Authorized Officer/Manager

¶5

...... Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kolikl Ra nga Swamy S/o K. Ra nganna Aged about 39 Years, Occ: Employee Rallway Quarters No.1095-^B, Tin Line, Guntakal, Ananta^pur - 515801 ....Defendant

¶8

: Smt. R. Aruna Counsel for the Applicant Counsel for the Defendant^{: Ex-parte}

¶9

::^qLLE& ::

¶10

The Applicant Bank^filed the^{present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs. 23,01,3881-^{from the sole defendantwith future} interest @ 11.550/o^p.a. with^{monthly rests from the date of} apptication tilt the date^{of reatization} "'o^ffiira

¶11

oA.NO.226/2026

¶12

Summon served on Sole Defendant through paper publication

¶13

and was set exparte on 16.06.2026 as called absent and no

¶14

representation.

¶15

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. V. Nagasai Teja, Assistant

¶16

Manager, as AW-1 and marked 5 documents through him as

¶17

Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.5.

¶18

A Heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant. perused the material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is: _

¶20

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

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.5 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.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.226/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Sole Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a Rs. 23,01,388/_ with future interest @ 11.55o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of rsalization; Wot'

¶24

oA.NO.22612026

¶25

ii) the applicant bank^{is also entitled to proceed} against the^{person and propertiesof} defendant for^{realization of its dues;}

¶26

iii) the applicant^{bankis entitledfor the costs'}

¶27

S.TheApplicantBankisdirectedtofileCostMemowithin2weeks 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,^{signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 18th^{Day of June, 2026)} frw,*

¶30

lnAr(esHwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Koliki Ranga Swamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Koliki Ranga Swamy

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

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

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Mahameed Kaleem

Hdfc Bank versus Anil Kumar

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

Yes Bank Limited versus Mr. Palla Madhava Reddy

State Bank of India versus Doraswamy Mohan Rohit Das