Allowed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/s. Shravan Enterprises.

DRT24 Mar 2026OA/245/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-II, Hyderabad, dismissed the ex-parte defendants' failure to appear and allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 29,50,241.14 plus interest. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable and authorized execution against the hypothecated vehicle and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 29,50,241.14 with interest; bank allowed to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/s. Shravan… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 245 OF 2025

¶5

M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Having its Office at 3'd Floor, Jewel Pawani Towers, Raj Bhavan Road Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500082. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Shravan Enterprises., Represented by its Proprietor Mr. Shravan Kumar Mote, H.No.3-9-53t/3/l Sree Rama Hills, Mansoorabad, LB Nagar Ranga Reddy, Telangana - 500068.

¶9

Mr. Shravan Kumar Mote S/o. Mr. Yadaiah Mote; P.No.165/P Road No.1, Yellareddy Colony Hayathnagar, Near Medimore Pharmacy Hyderabad - 501505.

¶10

Ms. Balam Sravani, D/o.Mr.Balam Narsimha, P.No.165/P, Road No.1 Yellareddy Colony, Hayathnagar Near Medimore Pharmacy, Hyderabad-501505.

¶11

... Defendants

¶12

: Mr. N. B. Sudarshan Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

:: ORDER ::

¶15

l. The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.29,50,241.14ps as on 12.02,2024 from the V r-ri:srrt\q ..'

¶16

oA.NO.245l2025

¶17

¶18

defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @1890 p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶19

Summons served on D1 to 3 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 37.07.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Abhishek P S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶21

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

¶22

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶24

6, As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.07 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶25

In the result, the present Oriqinal Application No.245l2025 is atrowed as under: - b\5>X

¶26

¶27

oA.NO.24s/2025

¶28

i) fne Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.29,50,241.14ps with future interest @10o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entiUed to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶30

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

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entiUed for the costs,

¶32

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

¶33

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶34

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 24th Day of March, 2026).

¶35

Ow* (RAtIESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/s. Shravan Enterprises.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. M/s. Shravan Enterprises.

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Priyanka Mahajan

Poreddy Malla Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

Mukkera Thirupathi Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

S R Trading Company versus Icici Bank Limited

Asset Reconstruction Company Limited versus Shailesh Kumar Gujjar

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. Capital Protection Private Limited.