Allowed

State Bank of India v. Kavali Ravi Kumar

DRT28 Jul 2026OA/444/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank's application for recovery of a term loan amount of Rs. 37.75 lakh with interest and costs against the ex-parte defendant, confirming liability and sanctioning sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendant liable to pay Rs.37,75,443 with interest; hypothecated vehicle to be sold for realization; applicant entitled to costs and recovery certificate.

State Bank of India versus Kavali Ravi Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 444 OF 2026

¶4

State Bank of India., SME H indupur Branch, Hindupur Dharmavaram, Sri Satya Sai District Andhra Pradesh - 515201. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kavali Ravi Kumar, S/o. Gengi Naidu Aged about 46 Years, Occ: Business, Male No.^{4-74, Kayalavandla Palli, Pulagampalle} Anantapur - 515591.

¶8

...Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Ms. Tarangini Pisipati

Defendant

: Ex-parte

:: CLLLLL ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.3L,75,443/- towards Term Loan A/c. No. 47529250933 from the defendant with future interest @11.40olo^p.a. with^{monthly rests} from^01.04.2026 till^{the date} of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶14

Summon sent to sole defendant returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served and was set ex-parte on 27.O7.2026 as called absent and no representation. OY'a't

¶15

oA.NO.444/2026

¶16

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Shaik Subhani, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 08 documents through her as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.08.

¶18

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

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed 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.l to A.08 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.444/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶23

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.37,75,443/towards Term Loan A/c. No. 41529250933; with future interest @8.55olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶24

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicte described in the ,/N.rx ,,.,/

¶25

oa.No .444/2026

¶26

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. {Dictated^{to thesteno, corrected,signedand pronounced} by me in the open court^on this the 28rh Dayofluly,2O26).

¶33

$(1'urt SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

State Bank of India v. Kavali Ravi Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Kavali Ravi Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kallakuntla Janardhan versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

Vinayaka Cold Storage versus Karnataka Bank Limited

Sri.Ashish Rahul Bhupathi and others versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd.

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Nunavath Pentya

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Hitha Net India Pvt. Ltd.

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Jaya Shakthi Rail Mech.