Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Mrs. Shabana Begum Moulvi

DRT20 Apr 2026OA/42/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte order, the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad allowed the Original Application filed by Indian Overseas Bank for recovery of Rs. 33,32,594/- with future interest from defendants who failed to appear or file representation. The court issued a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

The defendants were directed to pay Rs. 33,32,594/- with future interest and costs, and a Recovery Certificate was issued for enforcement.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Mrs. Shabana Begum… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF APRIL, 2A26

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 42 OF 2026

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank, Sl Towers, Vidyuth Nagar Circle, Ananthapur-515 001, Andhra Pradesh

¶6

..,..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mrs. Shabana Begum Moulvi W/o Late Sri Kanisettipalli Sadak Vali, Major, Female, R/o H.No.1L-2-46, Krishnadevaraya Naga r, Ananapur, A.P.515001

¶9

Mr. Jaffar Vali Kanisettipalli

¶10

F/O Late Sri Kanisettipalli Sadak Vali, Major, Rlo H.No. 1 L-2-46, Krishnadevaraya Nagar, Ananapur, A.P.515001 ,,,.Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Gampa Rangaiah

¶12

Counsel for the Defendants : Ex-pafte

¶13

:: ORDER ::

¶14

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 33,32,594/- with future interest @10.65^{o/o p.a.} from 26.LL.2025 till the date of realization along with costs, and in default, sale of OA Mortgaged eroO.v1fu$rr

¶15

oA.NO.4212026

¶16

Summon served on Defendants 1 & 2 through paper publication and were set expafte on L7.04.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. Jagannadha Rao Pitchuka, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 14 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.14.

¶18

Heard ex-parte arguments from the learned counsel for the applicant. Perused the material placed on record.

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is: -

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and Mortgage Property?

¶21

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.42/2A26 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendants 1 & 2 are jointly and severally are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs. 33,32,594/- with future interest @8.30o/o simple from the date of application till the date of rearizatioWry*rx

¶24

oA.NO.4212A26

¶25

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of mortgage of property, as described in the schedule annexed to the OA and applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same for realisation of dues;

¶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 entitled for the costs.

¶28

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

¶29

Issue Recovery Certifi cate accordi ngly.

¶30

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned.

¶31

(Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on thisthezo'n oayof April,2026L

¶32

[lW*;..va\ (nnhrfsnwAR KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Overseas Bank v. Mrs. Shabana Begum Moulvi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Mrs. Shabana Begum Moulvi

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

Idfc First Bank Ltd. Now versus Imagix Pyrolysis Plant

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Pagidi Jayamma

Repalle Salamma versus Sri Ram Finance Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Sri Shanmukha Traders

Smt Shaik Farzana and two others versus Khan Patan

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/s. G.V. Kiran Kumar Oil Mills