Allowed

The Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Charanjit Kaur Bagga

DRT27 Jan 2026OA/478/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad adjudicated an original application filed by YES Bank Limited for recovery of dues of Rs. 56,40,479.45 along with future interest and costs against two defendants. Finding the defendants absent and the evidence-clinched the bank's claim, the tribunal held them jointly and severally liable. The application was allowed with an order for recovery via hypoth

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs. 56,40,479.45 with future interest at 12.51% p.a., entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and properties for realization, and awarding co

The Yes Bank Limited. versus Mrs. Charanjit Kaur Bagga — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD ,DATED^{THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY} ,²⁰²⁶ PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB, (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

oRIGINAL APPLICATIoN No: +za.o.i zoz5 fhe YES Bank Limited., Office at #1-8-387, 2nd Floor, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.p Road, Secunderabad _ 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶3

.....Applicant.

¶4

Versus

¶5

Mrs. Charanjit Kaur Bagga, W/o. Gurupreet Sing[ Aged about 49 years, Occ: Self Employee R/o. F-5,^plot No.92, Nandagiri Hills, Banjara Hills Hyderabad - 500034.

¶6

Also at:-

¶7

R/o. H.No.3-t-249-250, S D Road Secunderabad - 500003,

¶8

Also at:-

¶9

R/o. Plot No.400, Road No.14 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500034.

¶10

Mr. Gurupreet Singh Bagga, S/o.Harmahender Singh, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Business R/o. F-5, Plot No.92, Nandagiri Hills, Banjara Hills Hyde;abad - 500034.

¶11

Also at:-

¶12

R/o. H.No.3-t-249-250, S D Road Secunderabad - 500003.

¶13

Also at:-

¶14

R/o. Plot No.400, Road No.14 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500034.

¶15

. .. Defendants

¶16

Counsel for the Applicant Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

¶17

Defendants tx-oate//.P6 Up{

¶18

oA.NO.478/2025

¶19

:: 9-LD-LL^::

¶20

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.56,40,479.45ps^{from the defendants jointly and} severally with^{future interest@18o/o p acompoundedwith} monthly rests from^{05.02.2025till the date of realizationalong} with costs and^{in default for saleof hypothecated vehicle'}

¶21

Summons served on^D1 and 2 through^{paper publication.They} 15.10.2025 as called^{absentand no}

¶22

were set ex-parte^on representation.

¶23

The Applicant Bank^examined Sai Pavan Gudivada,^Leqal Manager, as AW-1 and^marked 07 documents through^himas Ex. A.1 to Ex.^A.07.

¶24

Heard the Ld. Counsel^{for the} Applicant Bank.^{Perused the} material^{placed on record}

¶25

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

¶26

Whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the claim made in the^{OA against} the Defendants and OA^hypothecated vehicle?

¶27

As stated supra, the^{Defendants remained sx:p6rte.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 Defendants.} Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^{jointlyand severally liable} to pay the OA claim to the Appllcaqt^Bank with future^interest and costs. Cy*t

¶28

oA.NO.478l202s

¶29

7.	Inthere allowed a	sult,thepresentOriginalApplication No.478l2025is sunder:-
	i)	TheDefendantsarejointly andseverally liabletopaytotheApplicantBankasumof Rs.56,40,479.45pswithfutureinterest
		@12.51olo^p.a.simplefromthedateof applicationtillthedateofrealization;
	ii)	theOAclaimissecuredbywayof hypothecationofvehicledescribedinthe
		scheduleannexedtotheOA andthe applicant bank is entitledtoproceed against thesametorealiseitsdebU
	iii)	theapplicant bankisalsoentitledtoproceed
		againstthepersonandpropertiesof defendantsforrealizationofitsdues;
	iv)	theapplicant bankisentitledfor thecosts.
a	TheAppli fromthe	cantBank isdirectedto fileCostMemowithin2 weeks dateofreceipt ofthisOrder.
9.	Issue,Rec	overyCertificateaccording ly,
10.	Communic (Dictatedtot this the27th	ateacopy ofthisorderto thepartiesconcerned. hesteno, corrected,signedand pronouncedbymeintheopencourton DayofJanuary,2026l.

¶30

htut!'

¶31

ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

The Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Charanjit Kaur Bagga

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Charanjit Kaur Bagga

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