Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Kankara Somasekhara Reddy

DRT25 Aug 2026OA/635/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 42,44,496.34 with interest and costs since the defendant appeared ex-parte and evidence on record clinched the bank's claim.

What did the court decide?

The Defendant is ordered to pay Rs. 42,44,496.34 with future interest at 10.75% p.a. and costs. Recovery certificate to be issued. Access to defendant's property allowed for realization of dues.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Kankara Somasekhara Reddy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 25.rH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT: SH. MMESHWAR KoTHE, B.com. L.LB. (Hons. ), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 635 OF 2026 HDFC Bank Ltd. 1_1-0:6-9/3,^{3rd Ftoor, SuryodayaComptex} yp?^shoqp".o Stop, Begumpet, Hyde;abad_5oOo 16. Represented by its Authorised Signatory.

¶3

......Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Kankara Somasekhara Reddv S/O. Anjaneya prasada Rediv Age: 42^years; Occ: Business Vl Residency Ftat 501, Sagar Hilts Road No. 4, Kothapet, Hyderabad_500035.

¶6

Also At: Kankara Somasekhara Reddv C/O. Nakshatra Hospital, Atkapuri X Roads LD Nagar Near Temple, Hyderabad_5OOO3S.

¶7

Also At: Kankara Somasekhara Reddv S/O. Anjaneya prasada Redjv Age: 42 Years; Occ: Businesi 324-Agathavarappadu, Guntur-522509.

¶8

Defend a nt

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Lotus Law Associates Counsel for the Defendant : Ex-parte

¶10

:: oRDER ::

¶11

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 42,44,496.34ps from the defendant with future fus"t

¶12

oA.No.635/2026

¶13

interest @10.75olo^{p a with monthlyrestsfrom02 04'2026} till the date^{of realizationalongwith costs'}

¶14

Summons^{served on Sole Defendant and was set exparte} on 30.07.2026^{as called absentand no representation'}

¶15

The Applicant^{Bank examinedAdithya A S} '^{Legal Manager'as} AW-1 and^{marked 7 documentsthrough her as Ex A lto} Ex.A.7.

¶16

HeardLearnedcounselfortheApplicant'Perusedthematerial placed on record.

¶17

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

¶18

whether^{the Applicant Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendant?

¶19

As stated supra,^{the Defendant remainedex-parte'The} Evidence^{Affidavitcoupled with the recitals in the documents} viz., Exs.A.1^{to A.7 markedon behalf of the ApplicantBank} clinches the^{claimof the Applicant Bank againstthe Defendant'} Hence, I^{hold that the Defendant is liable to pay the OA claimto} the Applicant^{Bank with future interest and costs'}

¶20

In the result, the^{present Original ApplicationNo 635/2026 is} allowed as under:^-

¶21

The Defendant is^{liable to pay tothe}

¶22

i) Applicant^{Bank a sum of Rs. 42,44,496'34ps} with future interest @^{10.7570p.a' simple} /funu,t. L,!/

¶23

oA.No.635/2026

¶24

from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties of defendant for realization of its dues;

¶26

iii) the appllcant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶27

The Applicant Bank is dlrected to file Cost lYemo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶28

lssue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Communlcate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this rhe 25rh oay of Aueust, 2026).

¶30

{u*,.tr,>r* ( RAi4'ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Kankara Somasekhara Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Kankara Somasekhara Reddy

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Umiya Timber Trading.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Haneesh Babu Vuyyuru

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

Mohammed Faheemuddin versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Ramulu

Indusind Bank versus Sunand