Allowed

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Apr Infra Projects

DRT26 Feb 2026OA/646/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application seeking recovery of loan dues. The defendants appeared ex-parte. The court held the defendants liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Defendants liable to pay Rs. 46,28,204.66 plus future interest; Applicant entitled against hypothecated assets, defendants' properties, and costs; Recovery Certificate issued.

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Apr Infra Projects — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-IJ AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 646 OF 2025

¶4

M/s. YES BANK LTD., 2nd Floor, H.No.1-8-387, Agravanshi Plaza, HUDA Lane, S.P. Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep: By its Authorized Signatory Mr. Sai Pavan Gudivada, S/o. Mr. G. Bhaskar, Aged: 28 years, Legal Manager, M/s. YES Bank Ltd., R/o. Hyderabad.

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. APR Infra Projects, Represented by its Proprletor, Mr. Pradeep Reddy Athunuri

¶8

H. No.15-7-635/A/ 1, Shivasai Mehar Apartment, Plot No.203, Rotary Nagar, Khammam, Telangana-507002.

¶9

Mr. Venumadhav Reddy Athunuri, H. No.16-9- 113, Srinagar Colony, Road No.13, Khammam Urban, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam, Telangana-507002..

¶10

... Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the Applicant

¶12

: Mr. N. B. Sudarshan

¶13

Counsel for the Defendants : Ex-parte

¶14

//V1'''"'."^.tl
t-v / |,/ '-t.t)b'}<br>

¶15

oA.NO.546/202s

¶16

:: ORDER ::

¶17

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs. 46,28,204.66 ps with future interest @180/0 p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs, and in default, sale of OA hypothecated asset.

¶18

Summon served on defendants and were set exparte on 13.10.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined N4r. Sai Pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 7 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.7.

¶20

Heard ex-parte arguments from the Ld. Counsel of the Applicant Bank. Perused the material placed on record.

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is: -

¶22

Whether the Appticant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant and OA hypothecated asset?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.7 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.

¶24

In the result, the present Originat Application No.646/2025 is attowed as under: -

¶25

fu.6rr1

¶26

oA.NO.646/2025

¶27

i) The Defendants are liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs. 46,28,204.66 ps with future interest @9.25o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of rea lization ;

¶28

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of hypothecation of asset as described in the details of debts & assets annexed to the OA and the 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 properties of defendant 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 within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order,

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accord in g ly.

¶33

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶34

(Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 26th Day of February, 2025).

¶35

1foc'",/ (RffqESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Apr Infra Projects

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. v. M/s. Apr Infra Projects

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

Karnataka Bank Ltd. versus M/s Pragati Marbles

State Bank of India versus M/s. Jai Bharath Enterprises

Indian Bank versus M/s. Ganapathi Mobile Marketing

Canara Bank versus M/s. Modern and General Enterprises

Canara Bank versus Mrs. Nayana Gadangandla

M/S. State Bank of India versus M/s Sri Subrahmanya Jewellers (Borrower)