Allowed

M/s. Icici Bank Ltd., v. Mrs. Nellutla Temina

DRT14 Aug 2026OA/362/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In original application no. 362/2026, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for recovery of a loan sum with future interest and costs against a defaulting defendant, marking the application as allowed and issuing a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs. 25,80,563 with future interest; OA claim secured by hypothecation; bank entitled to proceed against defendant's person and properties for dues; costs awarded.

M/s. Icici Bank Ltd., versus Mrs. Nellutla Temina — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 14IH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 362 OF 2026

¶4

M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd., Branch oFfice at 6-2-1012, TGV Mansions Opp. Institution of Engineers, Khairatabad Hyderabad - 500004. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mrs. Nellutla Temina, D/o. Nettutla Abbaiah Age Major, Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o. Plot No.674 and 697, Ground Floor, Macha Bollaram. Near Opp Crown Imperial Villa Independent Macha Bollaram, Hyderabad-500010.

¶8

..,Defendant

¶9

: Mr. V. Dharmasuri Counsel for the Applicant Defendant : Ex-parteEx-parte

¶10

: Ex-parteEx-parte

¶11

:: ORDER ::

¶12

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.25,80,563/- towards Loan A/c. No. LUHYD00049631906 from the defendant with future interest @14olo p.a. with monthly rests from 27.02.2026 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶13

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publicaHon and was set ex-parte on 03.08,2026 as called absent and no representation. lfrK.os

¶14

oa.No.362/2026

¶15

The Applicant Bank examined Kalva Rajayaswanth, Manager, as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex.A.l to Ex.A.07.

¶16

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

¶17

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶18

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

¶19

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 liabte to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶20

In the result, the present Original Application No.362/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶21

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.25,80,563/towards Loan A/c. No. LU HYDOOO496319O6 with future interest @14olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶22

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described N-*in the

¶23

¶24

oA.NO.362l2026

¶25

schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entiued to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶26

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

¶27

iv) the applicant bank is entiued for the costs.

¶28

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

¶29

Issue Recovery Certincate accordingly.

¶30

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 14th Day ofAugust,2o26). ,,.X1

¶31

UW*'*o

¶32

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Icici Bank Ltd., v. Mrs. Nellutla Temina

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Icici Bank Ltd., v. Mrs. Nellutla Temina

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

City Union Bank Ltd. versus M/s Sree Gopala Krishna Flour and Oil Mill

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Raja Plastic Industries

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Mr. Dukka Rajesh Kumar

M/s. IndusInd Bank Limited. versus M/s. Hoya Enterprises.

M/s. IndusInd Bank Limited. versus M/s. Payzigo Fintech Private Limited.

Yes Bank Limited. versus v Murali Krishna