Allowed

Axis Bank Ltd. v. Keshar Gypsum Steels

DRT21 Apr 2026OA/40/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Axis Bank Ltd. against the respondents for recovery of the loan amount along with future interest, costs, and proceedings against hypothecated assets and properties.

What did the court decide?

To pay Rs.1,01,89,065.71 plus future interest and costs; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated assets and defendant properties.

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Keshar Gypsum Steels — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

. IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 215T DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 40 OF 2026

¶4

Axis Bank Ltd., 5-2-783/7A4, Modi Square, III Floor R P Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory. .....Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

Keshar Gypsum Steels., Rep by its Proprietor Santosh H.No.5-53/1, East Gandhi Nagar Nagaram Village, Hyderabad Medchal Malkajgiri - 500086.

¶7

Santosh Ashok Prajapati

¶8

D/o. Kesharam Dhannaji^PrajaPati

¶9

Age 33 Years, Occ: Business

¶10

Plot No.6p, 16p, Flat No.401,^{4th Floor} Dammaiguda Road, OPP VijaYa Diagnostics, Nagaram, Hyderbad -^500083.

¶11

...Defendants

¶12

: M/s. Lotus Law Associates Counsel for the Applicant

¶13

Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

::^qLLEL :;

¶15

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.1,O 1,89,065.71ps^{from the defendants jointlyand} severally with future interest @12.25olo^{p.a. compounded} monthly from the date of^{applicationtill the date of realization} along with costs and^{in default for sal€ of hypolhecatedassets'} / I_/ /4y-,*.r\ \ _-/ ^'

¶16

oA.NO.4Ol2025

¶17

¶18

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 20.04.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶22

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

¶23

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 behatf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Originat Application No.4Ol2026 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.1,01,89,065.71ps wiut- future interest OW'"''u

¶26

oa.No.40/2026

¶27

@72.25o/o^p.a. simple^{from the date of} application till the date of realization;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured by way^of hypothecation of assets described in the schedule annexed to the OA and^the applicant bank is entitled to^{proceed against} the same to realise its debu

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

The Applicant Bank is directed^to file^{Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordingly.

¶33

Communicate a^{copy of this order to the partlesconcerned.} (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and^{pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 21'r DayofApril,2026).

¶34

Q/.1',^+l:\ ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Axis Bank Ltd. v. Keshar Gypsum Steels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Axis Bank Ltd. v. Keshar Gypsum Steels

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 Sri Shanmukha Traders

Indian Overseas Bank versus Mrs. Shabana Begum Moulvi

Smt Shaik Farzana and two others versus Khan Patan

Karur Vysya Bank Limited versus M/S. Ameya Laboratories Limited

State Bank of India versus M/s. Ar Electronics.

Canara Bank versus Sri. D. Rama Krishna