Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold Spot

DRT5 Mar 2026OA/23/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by ICICI Bank Limited against three defendants. The court held that the defendants were liable to pay a sum of Rs. 79,68,704.87 plus future interest and costs, and ordered the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants jointly and severally to pay Rs. 79,68,704.87 with future interest; OA claim secured by mortgage; Applicant Bank entitled to proceed against property and persons of defendants; co

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com. L.LB. (Hons.), M.A.

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 23 OF 2026

¶5

ICICI BANK LIMITED ICICI Bank Tower, Plot No.12, Nanakramguda, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy - 500032. Telangana . ....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold Spot H.No. 1-4-55lA, Yellandu Road, Mahabuabad, Warangal. Telangana - 506101 Rep. by its Proprietor Sri Sunkari Appa Rao

¶8

1. Sri Sunkari Appa Rao Aged about 64 years H.No. 1-4-55/A, Yellandu Road, Mahabuabad, Warangal,

¶9

Telangana - 506101

¶10

1. Smt Sunkari Saraswathi Wo.^{Sri Sunkari AppaRao} Aged about 58 years H.No. 1-4-55lA, Yellandu Road, Mahabuabad, Warangal. Telangana - 506101

¶11

....Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

Counsel for the Defendants

¶14

: Mr. R, Rajendra Prasad , e*-ou*@.t,

¶15

oA.NO.2312026

¶16

:: ORDER ::

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery a total} sum of Rs.79,68,7A4.87^ps with^{future interest} @24o/o^{p.a. from} the date of filling the application till the date^{of realization along} with costs and, in default, sale of OA mortgaged^property.

¶18

Summon served on Defendant^{Nos. 1} to 3 and^{were set exparte} on 27.A2.2A26 as called absent and^{no representation.}

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. N. Chandrasekar, Regional Relationship Manager, oS AW-l and marked 16 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.16.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant repofted order may be^passed on record. Perused the material^placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is: -

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA mortgaged propertyT

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-pafte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.16 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Appticant Bank with future interest and costsow

¶24

oA.NO.23l2025

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No.2312026 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendant Nos. 1 to 3^jointly and severally are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs.79,68,704.87^ps with future interest @10.50o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of moftgage of property as described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debU

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled^{for the costs.}

¶30

The Applicant Bank is directed to file^{Cost Memowithin2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order'

¶31

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this^{order to the parties concerned.}

¶33

PRESiDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold Spot

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold Spot

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

M/s.Yes Bank Limited. versus Mr. Isarayal

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Rachineni Gangadevi

Ms Thulasi Traders Rep by its Prop Thulaseewar Reddy versus Shriram Finance Limited

Union Bank of India versus M/s v N Interiors

M/S. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. versus Mrs. Gugulothu Lakshmi

Bank of India versus M/s. Venkata Ramana Laxmi Wlccs