Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. MD Abdul Rasheed S/o. Mr. Mohd Abdul Ghafoor

DRT29 Jan 2026OA/353/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Yes Bank for recovery of Rs. 25,53,146.35 plus future interest and costs against a defendant who remained ex-parte, upholding the bank's claim based on marked documents.

What did the court decide?

Ordered defendant to pay Rs. 25,53,146.35 plus interest at 16.01% p.a., costs, and allowed bank to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and other properties.

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. MD Abdul Rasheed S/o. Mr. Mohd… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS^{RECOVERY TRiBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS^{THE29THDAY OF JANUARY,2026} PRESENT: SH, RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE,B.COM.,L.LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 353 OF 2025}

¶3

M/S.YES Bank Limited., Office at 1-8-387,^{2ND Floor} Aqravanshi^{Plaza, HUDA Lane} S]P. Roaa, Secunderabad -^500003. Rep. by its Authorized^SignatorY.

¶4

Versus

¶5

Mr. MD Abdul Rasheed,^S/o.Mr.Mohd Abdul Ghafoor, H.No.18-9-424 Chandrayanagutta,^Bandlaguda Hyderabad - 500005.

¶6

Also at;14r. MD Abdul Rasheed, S/o.Mr.Mohd Abdul Ghafoor, H. No.5-9-⁶² Khanlateef Khan Estate, Opp^{Fateh f4aidan} Opp. LB Stadium, Hyderabad -^500024.

¶7

...Defendant

¶8

: I\4r. N. B. Sudarshan Counsel for the Applicant Defendant : Ex-parteEx-parte

¶9

: Ex-parteEx-parte

¶10

:: qLq_q& ::

¶11

1, The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum 'of Rs.25,53,146.35ps from the defendant with future interest @18o/o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of /\nn - - , hvDothecated veh icle. ) -!.tI t!

¶12

oA.NO.3s3/2025

¶13

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication

¶14

and was set ex-parte on 09.10.2025 as called absent and no

¶15

representation.

¶16

The Applicant Bank examined Sai^pavan Gudivada, Manager, AS

¶17

AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.07.

¶18

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the m,glqra?l^pJgcFd.,g{' AFggLd..,^^,,-anr !.ar.i,z t^1,nci *rq, ,\6,.6^,i5h}

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendant 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 Defendant. Hence, I hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.353/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.25,53,146.35ps with future interest @16.01% p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization; fu,u

¶24

¶25

oA.NO.3s3l2025

¶26

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 entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

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

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

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 29th Day of January, 2025).

¶32

.-)lt'\J ks*\ ,/ SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. MD Abdul Rasheed S/o. Mr. Mohd Abdul Ghafoor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. MD Abdul Rasheed S/o. Mr. Mohd Abdul Ghafoor

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

The Yes Bank Limited. versus Mr. G. Narasing Rao

Yes Bank versus Ravanaboina Malleshwari

Bank of Baroda versus M/s. Sri Vinayaka Enterprises.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus M/S. Srivay Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Mr. Ayathulla Khan

Harinath Pendyala versus Axis Bank