Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Sree Venkateswara Beauty Services.

DRT24 Aug 2026OA/541/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Union Bank of India. The court held respondents jointly and severally liable to pay a specific sum with interest, costs, and allowed relief over hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Directed Defendants to pay Rs.23,02,979.18 with interest @8.70% p.a. and costs; allowed recovery from hypothecated assets and defendants' properties; issued Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Sree Venkateswara Beauty… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATEO THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.COM., L.LB.^{(HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO^: 547 0F 2026

¶4

Union Bank of India., One of the Branch at Moulali Branch Hyderabad, Telanga na State. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Sree Venkateswara Beauty^Services.. Rep by its Proprietor, Mr. Sampath^Kumar Regoti, Plot No.15, SS Heights,^{A S Rao} Na9ar, Dammalguda, Hyderabad-500083'

¶8

Mr. Sampath Kumar Regoti S/o. Sri Swamy Regoti,^{Aged about} 43 Years, Occ: Business, Gender^Male R/o. Flat No.5, B Block, Vista^Homes NN Colony, Kushaiguda,^{Hyderabad-500062.}

¶9

... Defendants

¶10

: Mr.Momin Mohammed^Rafiq Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: CLLLE& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^{present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.23,O2,979.LAps^{from the defendantsjointly and} severally with future interest @8.700lo^{p.a. with monthlyrests} along with^{penalinterest} @2o/o^{p.a. from the date of application} till the date of realization^{along \lith cost-s and in default for} sate of oA hypothecated u.r",r. /ft-S!t

¶15

oa.No.s4112025

¶16

¶17

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publicatlon. They were set ex-parte on 17.08.2026 as called absent and no rePresentation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined V Gopala krishna, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 11 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.11.

¶19

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

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated assefs?

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.11 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay the OA clalm to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No.541/2026 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.23,02,979.18ps with future interest @8.70% p.a. simple from the date of apptication ti the date or rearizatiofu. ut$

¶25

oA.NO.541/2026

¶26

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of assets described in the 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

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 the steno, corrected, sitned and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 24th Day ofAugust,2026).

¶33

0W*Yo'v (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Sree Venkateswara Beauty Services.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/s. Sree Venkateswara Beauty Services.

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

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mrs. Bonasi Rajitha

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Gulli Stephen

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Swarna Sunil Kumar

Canara Bank versus Gowtham Polymers

Uco Bank versus M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Pharma.

Mr Krishna Datta Sastry Addepalli versus Axis Bank