Allowed

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. v. Sri. Emani Kodanda Sharma

DRT22 Jun 2026OA/299/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by a financial reconstruction company for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 29,93,752.13 with interest. Being an ex-parte order against respondents who failed to appear, the Tribunal accepted the evidence of the applicant's witness as conclusive proof of the debt and the validity of the mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to be jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 29,93,752.13 ps with future interest @ 10.75% p.a. and costs; Applicant directed to file cost Memo; Recovery Certificate issued.

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus Sri. Emani… — Property and Title | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERYTRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026}

¶2

PRESENT: SH.^{RAMESHWAR KOTHE,B.COM. L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 299 OF 2026}

¶4

PEGASUS ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION^{PVT LTD,} Acting in its Capacity^{of Trustee of Pegasus Group} One Trust 32^{having its Corporate Office at 55-56,} 5th Floor, Free^{Press House, NarimanPoint,} Mumbai-400021 and^{one of its Representatives} Office at: Regus^{Business Centreat 1-10-39to 44,} Level 4, Gumidelli^{Towers, Begumpet, Hyderabad-16,} Represented by^{its Authorized signatory}

¶5

"""Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sri. Emani^{Kodanda Sharma} S/o Late Ermani^Punnaiah, Flat no. 203,^{Phase 2, Baheti} ResidencY, Saleem^{Nagar colonY,} Moosarambagh,^{HYderabad-500036}

¶8

Also, at

¶9

Sri. Emani^{Kodanda Sharma} S/o Late Ermani^Punnaiah, Proprietor of^{M/s. Sri AnnaPurna} Traders, H. no.^{16-1 1-2 l2l 49,} East Prashanth^{Nagar, Moosarambagh,} Hyderabad-500036

¶10

Smt. Annapurna W/o Sri. Emani^{Kodanda Sharma,} Flat no. 203,^{Phase 2, Baheti Residency,} Saleem Nagar^{colony, Moosarambagh,} ^ Hyderabad:500036 ,/V' ""Defendants ///Sttt* (-(

¶11

oA.NO.29912025

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

Counsel for the Defendants

¶14

: Mr. G. Bhanu Murthy

¶15

: Ex-parte

¶16

:: oRDER::

¶17

The Applicant Bank fited the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 29,93,752.13 ps as on 0g.09.2025 from defendants 1 & 2 jointly and severally with future interest @ 14.05o/o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and, in default, sale of O.A. mortgaged property.

¶18

Summonses served on Defendants 1 & 2 and were set exparte on 19.06.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. Mahesh Kumar, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through them as Ex.A.1to Ex.A. 10.

¶20

Heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant. perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is: -

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the ctaim made in the OA against the Defendants and O.A. monjaged property?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the "'A#i'"'i"'u"'

¶24

oA.NO.29912026

¶25

viz., Exs.A.1 to^{A.10 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants'} Hence, I hold that^{the Defendantsare liable to pay the oA claim} to the Applicant^{Bank with futureinterest and costs.}

¶26

In the result,^{the present original ApplicationNo.29912026 is} allowed as^{under: -}

¶27

The Defendants 1^{& 2 are jointly and}

¶28

i) severallyliab]etopaytotheApplicantBanka sumRs-ZB,g3,T52.t3pswithfutureinterest @ !0.75o/o^{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, as^{described in the schedules} annexed to^{the OA and applicantbank is} entitled to^{proceed against the same for} realisation of dues;

¶30

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

¶31

iv)theapplicantbankisentitledforthecosts.

¶32

B. The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file cost Memo within2 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'} court on

¶35

(Dictated to the steno, .orie.t"d,^{signedand pronounced by n*} il]:- "pen ir'i, tr,. 22nd^{Day of,June, 2026ir.} QSflq.U*

¶36

t{krsnWnn^KorHE) PRESIDING^OFFICER

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. v. Sri. Emani Kodanda Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. v. Sri. Emani Kodanda Sharma

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

Mr Yempalla Mahipal Reddy versus Union Bank of India

Sri Perumandla Kishan versus M S Ikf Home Finance

Kalla Rajeshwari versus South Indian Bank

Canara Bank versus M/s. Nakoda Shopping Mall.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Veluri Vamshkrishna

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Hygiene Retail India Private Ltd.