Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sri Keshava Chary Venjarapu

DRT6 Jul 2026OA/539/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Maharashtra's original application for recovery of dues. The court held the defendants liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and granted the bank rights to proceed against mortgaged property and the defendants' personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs.70,29,982.82 with interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and respondents; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sri Keshava Chary Venjarapu — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 6IH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com. L.LB. (Hons.). M.A PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 539 OF 2026

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra 22-1O2, cF, Kamatagiri ptaza R.K. Nagar, Safitqudi Hyderabad-500047 Rep. by its Authorised Officer

¶4

......Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Sri Keshava Chary Venjarapu S/o Sri. Veera Brahmam Venjarapu Age:41,^yrs. Occ: Business H.No.C-707,^phase 1, Near Jalakanya Hotel, Altwyn Colony, Kukatpa y, Near Jalakanya Hotel, Kukatpally, Tirumalagiri, Medchal Malkajgiri. Tela n9a na -5000 72

¶7

Also At

¶8

Ftat No.101, Ptot No.144 and 145, Madhavram Sethayya Nilaydm (M Srinivas Rao Apartmeni) Madhavram Nagar Colony, Kukatpally, Medchat, Matkajgiri District 500072

¶9

Also At

¶10

Flat No. 402, 4th Floor, A-Btock, Elegant Homes, in Survey Nos. 357,358 and 359/ Kanajijuda, Lotus Pond Colony, Near^petrolpump, Tlrumalagiri District 500015

¶11

Smt. Satya Kalavathi Venjarapu Wo^Keshav Chary Venjarapu Age: 40 Major Occ: Buslness oW"\

¶12

oA.NO.s39/2026

¶13

H.No.C-707, Phase^{1, NearJalakanYa} Hotel, Allwyn ColonY,^KukatPallY, Near Jalakanya^{Hotel, KukatPallY,} Tirumalagiri, Medchal^Malkajgiri, Telangana-500072

¶14

AISO At

¶15

Flat No.101, Plot^{No.144and 145,} Madhavram Sethayya^NilaYam (M Srinivas Rao APartment) Madhavram Nagar^ColonY, KukatpallY, Medchal,^Malkajgiri District 500072

¶16

Also At

¶17

Flat No. 402,^{4th Floor, A-Block,} Elegant Homes,^{in SurveY Nos.} 357,358 and 359,^{Kanajijuda,Lotus} Pond Colony, Near^PetrolPumP, Tirumalagiri District 500015 '...Defendants

¶18

Counsel for the Applicant^{: Ms. Sangeeta laiswal} Defendants : Ex-Parte

¶19

:: ORDER::

¶20

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for^{the recoverya total} sum of Rs. 70,29,982.82^ps from defendants¹ &^{2 jointly and} severally with future interest @ 9.75o/o^p.a. with monthly rests from 22.04.2026 till the date of realization along with costs, and in default sale of OA mortgaged^propefty.

¶21

2, Summonses served on Defendants 1 & 2 and were set exparte on 03.07.2026 as called absent and no representatio rA;#*

¶22

oA.NO.s39/2026

¶23

The Applicant Bank examined Mr. Nandan Sudhir Ku lka rni, ChieF Manager, as AW-1 and marked 12 documents through them as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.12.

¶24

Heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant. 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 moftgaged properw?

¶27

As stated supra/ the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.12 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.

¶28

In the result, the present Original Application No.539/2026 ls allowed as under:^-

¶29

i) The Defendants 1 & 2 are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs.70,29,982.82^ps with future interest @ 9.00o/o^p.a. simple from the date^of application till the date of rcalizationl%,\

¶30

¶31

oA.NO.s39/2026

¶32

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;

¶33

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

¶34

iv) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

131-.11a"9,1"^,n"^{steno, corrected,signedand p-r"r".IJUV ," in the open court on} this the 6th Day ofJuly, 2026).

¶38

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶39

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sri Keshava Chary Venjarapu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sri Keshava Chary Venjarapu

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

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Delite food products

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Sharathkumar Katikaneni

Mrs Y Yandhana and another versus Union Bank of India

Ms Pooja Steel Enterprises versus Bank of Baroda

Nakkala Ilaya Yadav and Others versus Iifl Home Finance Limited

Canara Bank versus Sri. Madduri Sreenivas