Allowed

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Uppalapati Janaki Ram

DRT30 Jan 2026OA/587/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Original Application No. 587 of 2025, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's recovery application. The defendant remained ex-parte. The court held the defendant liable to pay the claimed sum, secured by hypothecated vehicles, with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 21,60,264.91 with future interest and costs; claim secured by hypothecated vehicles; recovery certificate issued.

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Uppalapati Janaki Ram — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 3OTH DAY OF ]ANUARY, 2026 PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWARISIH_EI B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 587 OF 2025 M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. Office at 1-8-387, 2nd Floor, Agtavanshi^plaza, Huda Lane, S.P. Road, Secunderabad_500003. .... Applica nt Versus

¶3

l. Mr. Uppalapati Janaki Ram, :/o. Y.^{A.njaneyutu, Aged: 41 years,} Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No. 403, Manisha Apts, Raja Srinivasa Colony, Mirjalguda, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad_5 OOOql . Also at: C/o. Sri Venkateswara Cine Chitra LLp, Plot No, 287, phase 2, KamalaDuri Colonv. Sri Nagar Colony, Hyderabad _ 500073^" Also at: l/9..H._^{No. 9-126, Opp: Current Sub Station,} Pedda Irlapadu, Kanigiri, prakasam_5231L7.' ...Defendants Counsel for the Applicant Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy Defendants Ex-parte

¶4

:: ORDER:: 1. The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.2L,60,264.91Ps f r om the^defendant with future )lps romrry&k

¶5

oA.NO.s87l2025

¶6

interest @18o/o^{p.a' from26'03'2025 till the date of realization} along with^{costs and in defaultfor sale of hypothecated} veh icles '

¶7

Summons^{served on sole defendant' He was set ex-parte on} 13.10.2025^{as called absentand no representation'}

¶8

The^{Applicant Bank examined Mr' Sai Pavan Gudivada'Legal} Manager,^{as AW-1and marked 7 documentsthrough him as Ex'} A.1 to Ex'^A.7.

¶9

4,HeardtheLd.CounselfortheApplicantBank.Perusedthe material Placed^{on record'}

¶10

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

¶11

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendants^{and OA hypothecated} vehicles?

¶12

As stated^{supra, the Defendant remainedex-parte' The} Evidence Affidavit^{coupledwith the recitals in the documents} viz., Exs' A.1^{to A'7 marked on behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claim of the Applicant Bank againstthe Defendant'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendantis liable to pay the OA claim to} the Applicant^{Bank with futureinterest and costs'}

¶13

T.Intheresult,thepresentOriginalApplicationNo'587/2025is allowed as^{under: -}

¶14

i) The Defendant is^{liable topay to the} Applicant Bank a sum of^{Rs'21,60,264.91Ps} ffir*

oA.NO.s872025

with future interest @9.g10lo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶19

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of vehicles described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶20

iii) the appricant bank is arso entired to proceed against the person and properties of defendant for realization of its dues;

¶21

iv) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶22

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

¶23

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶24

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pro";r;.;;;;;: in the open court on this the 30th Day of January, 2026).

¶25

(RAMESHwAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Uppalapati Janaki Ram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Uppalapati Janaki Ram

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

Jitendra Singh Rathore versus Union Bank of India

Harinath Pendyala versus Axis Bank

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Mr. Ayathulla Khan

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Marri Krishna Reddy

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mr. Amgothu Shekhar

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Kumbam Tirupataiah