Allowed

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. v. Ms. Tm Monica

DRT11 Mar 2026OA/564/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by YES Bank Limited for recovery of a debt of Rs. 26,31,022.72 from the defendant, Ms. T M Monica, with future interest and costs, securing the claim against a hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs. 26,31,022.72 with future interest and costs; Bank entitled to proceed against the hypothecated vehicle, defendant person and properties.

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. versus Ms. Tm Monica — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY^{TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD} DATED THIS THE^{11THDAY OF MARCH,2026}

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR^{KOTHE, B'Com., L.LB' (Hons'),M'A'} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^{No: 564 OF 2025}

¶4

M/s. YES Bank Limited., Office at 1-B-387,^2NDFloor Agravanshi Plaza,^{HUDA Lane} S.P.Road, Secunderabad -^500003. Rep. by its Authorized^SignatorY.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ms. T M Monica,^{D/o. Mr. Tanjaor} Kuppuswamy^{Mohan, Plot No.B 9} Vampuguda,^{Phase1, SainikPuri} Kapra, ECIL,^{Medchal Malkajgiri} Hyderabad - 500062.

¶8

. . . Defendant

¶9

Counsel^{for the APP|icant}

¶10

: Mr. N. B. Sudarshan

Defendant

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER^::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of^{Rs.26,31,022.72psfrom the defendantwith future} interest @18o/o^{p.a. compounded with monthly rests from the} date of^{application till the date of realization along with costs} and in default^{for sale of hypothecated vehicle'}

¶15

Summon^{served on sole defendant through paper publication} and was set^{ex-pe-rteon 30'10'2025 as called absent and no} ,"r".""o,,o "(/N*

¶16

oA.NO.564/202s

¶17

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Sai pavan Gudivada, I4anager, as AW-l and marked 07 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.07.

¶19

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank. perused the

¶20

material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiued for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.l to A.O7 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.

¶24

In the resutt, the present Originat Apptication No.56412025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendant is liabte to pay to the Appticant Bank a sum of Rs,26,3t,022.72ps with future interest 69.go7o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

ii) tf:e OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicle described in the schedule annexed to_ Ihe OA and the " " /Pry'"'\

¶27

oA.NO.s641202s

¶28

applicant bank is entitled to^proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled^{for the costs.}

¶31

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to^{file Cost Memo within2 weeks} from the date of receipt of^{this Order.}

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Communicate a copy of^{this order to the parties concerned.} (Dictated to the steno, corrected,^{signedand pronouncedbyme in the open court on} this the 11th Day of^{March, 2026).}

¶34

,K"s

¶35

PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. v. Ms. Tm Monica

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. v. Ms. Tm Monica

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

Canara Bank versus M/s. Teknik Enterprises.

Canara Bank versus M/s. Sri Sai Silk Sarees.

Yes Bank Limited versus M/s. Satya Sai Transport

Union Bank of India versus Sundarapalli Venkataiah

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. versus Ms. Padal Bhavya

M/S Abrars Today Fashion Mall versus City Union Bank Limited