Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vangaveti Jyothi/Artham Jyothi

DRT13 Aug 2026OA/259/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte original application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of Rs.58,58,010/-jointly and severally against respondents, the Tribunal held that the evidence filed clinched the claim and granted recovery along with future interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.58,58,010/- with interest and costs; proceedings confirmed against mortgaged property and personal assets; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vangaveti Jyothi/Artham… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 259 OF 2026

¶5

Bank of Maharashtra., Branch Office at Safilguda, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Vangaveti Jyothi/Artham Jyothi Wo.^{ArthamPrashanth, Age 35 Years} Pcc: Pvt. Employee, H. No.12- 119/1 sankalpa Multispecialty Hospital 24 /7 Srinivas Nagar, Nalgonda - 508206, TG.

¶9

Artham Prashanth, S/o. Artham Ganesh Age 39 Years, Occ: Pvt. Employee H.No.4-9-80s/KVN/Pz0, S-68-E, KVN Reddy Nagar, Telangana Minority Hostel Road, Bagh Hayathnagar, Rangareddy District - 501505, TG.

¶10

...Defendants

¶11

: Mr. G. Adrian Kiran Raj Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: (LLLEL ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery a total} sum of Rs.58,58,010/- as on^{23.01.2026from the defendants} jointly and severally with future interest @8'85o/o p.a. with monthly rests from 06.01.2026 till the^{date of realizationalong} with costs and in default for *" property.

ZM:le

oa.No.2s9l2026

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 12.08.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined K Arvind Nayak, Branch Manager, as AW-1 and marked 13 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.13.

¶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 schedule propefty?

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.13 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 Original Application No.259/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶26

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.58,58,010/- with future iDterest @8.9570 fu't':uu

¶27

oA.NO.2S9l2025

¶28

p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶29

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

¶30

rii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendants for realization of lts dues;

¶31

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶32

The Appllcant 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, si8ned and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 13'h Day ofAugust,2026).

¶35

PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vangaveti Jyothi/Artham Jyothi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vangaveti Jyothi/Artham Jyothi

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. Orginpulse Pharmaceuticals Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Kothapalli Dharma Teja

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mohd Ikram Khan

M/s. Dcb Bank Limited. versus Mr. Sagaram Basavana Goud

Bank of India versus M/s. Chaitanya Metal Industries.

Ch Shekhar Babu versus Bank of Baroda