Allowed

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Boge Eshwari

DRT27 Jan 2026OA/254/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 24,70,250.76 with interest and costs against defaulting joint borrowers, holding documents sufficient to establish liability and saleability of hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 24,70,250.76 with future interest; hypothecated vehicle made liable; Recovery Certificate issued.

The Yes Bank Limited versus Mrs. Boge Eshwari — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD ,DATED^{THIS THE 27IH} DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT; SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com., L,LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN No : 254 0F 2025

¶3

The YES Bank Limited., Office at #1-8-387, 2d Floot, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.p Road, Secunderabad Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

.....Applicant.

Versus

Mrs. Boge Eshwari, W/o. B Srinivas Aged,about 42years, Occ: House Wife H.No.4- 126, Matawada, Gunjapadugu Karimnaga r - 505184.

¶8

I'4r. Boge Srinivas, S/o. B Gattaiah Aged about 52^years, Occ: Business H.No.4- 126, Malawada, Gunjapadugu Karimnagar - 505184.

¶9

. .. Defenda nts

¶10

Cou nsel for the Applicant

¶11

Defendants

¶12

: Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

¶13

:Ex-parte

¶14

:: ORDER ::

¶15

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.24,70 ,250.76ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18olo p.a. compounded with monthly rests trom 03.12.2024 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶16

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 15.^Q9.2025 as called absent and no representation. !ft'o**

¶17

oA.NO.2s4l202s

¶18

The Applicant Bank^{examinedSai Pavan Gudivada,Legal} Manager, as AW-1^{and marked 07 documentsthrough him as} Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.07.

¶19

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

¶20

The^point that arises^{for consideration is:-}

¶21

Whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the ctaim made^{in the OA against} the Defendants and^{OA hypothecated} vehicle?

¶22

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^{Defendantsare jointlyand severallyliable} to pay the OA claim to the^{Applicant Bank with future interest} and costs.

¶23

In the result, the^{present Original Application No.254/2025is} allowed as under:^-

¶24

i) The Defendants are^jointly and^severally liable to pay to the Applicant^Bank a^{sum of} Rs.24,70,250.76ps with future^interest @11olo P.a.^{simPle from thedate of} application till the date of realization;

¶25

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the s'rt

I q

oA.NO.2s4l2o2s

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 entitled to proceed

¶31

defendants for realization of its dues;

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entiUed for the costs.

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

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 27th Day of January, 2026).

¶36

$ffi-rvr'u

¶37

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶38

rnrs rnC / t-' lle\t ot llil,att ,/0)6t

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Boge Eshwari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Yes Bank Limited v. Mrs. Boge Eshwari

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

Indian Bank versus M/s. Camon Frames.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. S RTraders.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Kakalwar Suresh

Bank of Baroda versus Veeramasu Jayamma

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap