Allowed

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mr. Yelamandhala Ramesh

DRT3 Sept 2026OA/296/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Yes Bank Limited for recovery of Rs.22,51,209.12 plus future interest from two respondents who appeared ex-parte, upholding the bank's lien on mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay ₹22,51,209.12 with future interest; recovery certificate issued; costs awarded.

Yes Bank Limited. versus Mr. Yelamandhala Ramesh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 296 OF 2026

¶6

YES Bank Limited., Office at 1-8-387, 2nd Floor, Aoravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S P Road, Secunderabad-soooo3. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr, Yelamandhala Ramesh

¶10

S/o. Y Sathyam, Aged about 46 Years

¶11

Occ: Business. R/o. H,No.1-87, Vinjaram Musalimadugu, West Godavari District- 5071 14.

¶12

Also at: -

¶13

R/o. Plot No.6, Prasanth Nagar, Shapur Na9ar, Jeedimetla, Quthubullapur Hyderabad - 500055.

¶14

Also at:-

¶15

R/o. Plot No. 23-212, Prasantha Nagar Shapur Na9ar, Balanagar, Medchal Malkajgiri District - 500055.

¶16

Also at:-

¶17

R/o. Plot No.5, Aroor Village, Sadashivpet Sanga Reddy District - 502291.

¶18

Also at: -

¶19

R/o. H.No.49-289, Padma Nagar Phase I, Chintal, Tirumalgiri Hyderabad District - 500054.

¶20

Mrs. Yelamandhala Swapna, Wo. Ramesh Aged about 40 Years, Occ: Housewife R/o. Plot No. 6, Prasanth Nagar, Shapur Nagar, Jeedimetla, Quthubu_!lapur Hyderabad - s000ss. f7W" ...Defendants a

¶21

oA.NO.296/2025

¶22

¶23

Counsel for the Applicant

¶24

Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

Ex-parte

:: CLLD-L& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.22,51,ZOg.LZps from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @187o p.a. compounded with monthly rests from 21.01.2026 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶29

Summons sent to D1 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served, whereas summons served on D2 to 3 through paper^publication. They were set ex-parte on 02.09.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶30

The Applicant Bank examined Sai Pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.10.

¶31

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

¶32

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶33

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶34

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.10 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank

¶35

oA.NO.29612026

¶36

¶37

clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the^Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^{jointlyand severallyliable} to^pay the OA claim to the^{Applicant Bank with futureinterest} and costs.

¶38

In the result, the^present Original Application^{No.296l2026is} allowed as under:^-

¶39

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant^Bank a^{sum of} Rs.22,51,209.12ps with future^interest @6.50lo^{p.a. simple from the date of} application till the date of^realization;

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Issue Recovery certificate accofiinstY.y'Tw\b

¶45

oA.NO.296/2026

¶46

¶47

Communicate a copy of this order to the partles concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, sitned and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 03d Day of September, 2026). /-i'.|,

¶48

/-i'.|,

¶49

/-i'.|, // Atwev

¶50

//,/)al'titun3

¶51

({A}GSHWAR KoTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

lt{

oA 296/26

02.09.2026

03.09.2026

Sri M Sai Kiran representing MSR counsel for applicant^present. Summons served on D1, refused, PP filed for D2, called absent, no representation and set exparte. A1 to 10 already marked and reported no further AE. For exparte arguments, call on 03.09.2026.

¶59

¶60

P.O.

¶61

sri M Sai Kiran representing^{MSR counselfor applicant} submitted exparte arguments.^{Orders will be passed during} course.

N.i-l

P. O.

03.09.2026

Orders Pronounced, vide separate sheets.

¶66

In the result OA.No.296/2026 is allowed with Recovery Certificate accordingly. Mcosts. Issue

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mr. Yelamandhala Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mr. Yelamandhala Ramesh

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

Icici Bank Limited. versus M/s. Global Energy.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Chakravarthy Hanumanthu

Canara Bank versus M/s. M Rs Fusion

Union Bank of India versus sri akshara girls hostel

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya

Idbi Bank versus Venkatswamy