Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Tulluru Srinivas

DRT27 Jan 2026OA/425/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited for recovery of Rs.28,45,950/- from the defendant Tulluru Srinivas. The Debt Recovery Tribunal, relying on the applicant's evidence and the defendant's absence, held the defendant liable and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs.28,45,950/- with future interest and costs; Recovery Certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Tulluru Srinivas — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD OATED THIS THE 271.H DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR Ko ,^.r,rrr}j;ru,'..ffl^{., L. LB.(Hons.), M.A.}

¶2

Original Application No: 425 OF 2O2S M/s. ICICI Bank Limited. _ Gachibowli, Hyderabad. Rep. by its General power of Attorney.

¶3

.....Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Tulluru Srinivas, S/o. Madhavarao fu uru prot No.482, Flat No.G1, Reddy Avenue r\rzampet Main Road, Nizamoet Hyderabad - 5O0O9O.

¶6

...,..Defendant

¶7

Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

lvlr. Anil Vydya

Ex-parte

:: oRDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery of a sum of Rs.28,45,950/- from the defendant with future interest @2olo p.m. compounded with monthty from 11.04.2025 till the date of realisation along with costs.

¶13

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 12.08.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶14

3 The Applicant Bank examined K. Raja^yaswanth, Legal Manager as

¶15

AW- 1 and marked 09 documents throuqtr^ him as Ex. A.l to Ex. A.09. rry,*

¶16

OA.No'425/202s

¶17

¶18

Heard^{the Ld, Counselfor the Applicant Bank and perused the} material Placect^{on record'}

¶19

The^{point that arises for consideration is:-}

¶20

Whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled for} the claim^{madie in the OA againstthe} Defendant?

¶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.09 marked^{on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of} the Applicant^{Bank againstthe 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'425/2025is} allowed as^{under: -}

¶23

i) The Defendant^{is liable to pay to the Applicant Banka} sum of Rs'28,45,950/-^{with futureinterest@10'25o/o} p.a. simple, from the date^{of applicationtill the date of} realization;

¶24

ii) the applicant bank^{is also entitled to proceed against} the person and^{properties of the defendantfor} realization of its dues;

¶25

iii) the applicant bank^{is entitledfor the costs.}

¶26

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file^{Cost Memo within 2 weeks} from the date of receipt ot *is oraer.1fu'.9t\

¶27

oA.No.425/2025

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingfy.

¶29

¶30

ol this order fi:[.F13.i:t?:^'?pv Ig Ih:^{parries concerned.} open court ";;;;;:;$H'ff:jJ.l3;*.;;: i,r1.:?i,o ,,ono,nced by me in the

¶31

#HK,* ,ruisilH#3t![,

¶32

r-_- ----

¶33

Icici Bank Limited v. Tulluru Srinivas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Tulluru Srinivas

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

Indian Bank versus M/s. Camon Frames.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. S RTraders.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Kakalwar Suresh

Bank of Baroda versus Veeramasu Jayamma

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap

Bank of Baroda versus Doddi Prathap