Allowed

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Gandamalla Janakiram

DRT11 Feb 2026OA/647/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This DRT disposed of the applicant bank's ex-parte original application. The bench found that the evidence affidavit and marked documents established the debt. The order declared the respondents jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed amount with future interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Relief granted: Payment of Rs. 28,68,057.81 with future interest @12.01% p.a., costs, and issuance of recovery certificate.

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Gandamalla Janakiram — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,²⁰²⁶

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No: 647 OF 2025

¶5

lvl,/s. YES Ba nk Ltd., 2nd Floor, H.No.1-8-387, Agravanshi Plaza HUDA Lane, S P Road, Secu ndera bad- 500003. Rep by its Authorized signatory

¶6

Appricant

¶7

Versus

¶8

14r. Gandamalla lanakira m

¶9

S/o. lYr. Balaraju, H. No.1-60/¹

¶10

M ustya la Palle, Cheemalkondur

¶11

Yadadri Bhongir, Nalgonda

¶12

Telanga na - 508116.

¶13

Ms. Gandamalla Hemalatha

¶14

D/o. Mr. Bala Narasimha, H.No.1-60/1

¶15

M ustyala Palle, Cheemalkond ur

¶16

Yadadri Bhongir, Nalgonda

¶17

Telangana - 508116.

¶18

.. . ... Defenda nts

¶19

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. N. B. Sudarshan

¶20

Defendants

¶21

: Ex-parte

¶22

:: qLD-L& ::

¶23

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the TecoveTy of a sum of Rs.28,68,057.81ps from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18o/o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realisation along with costs.^)ftt<.r-( '-\'!(

¶24

OA,No.64712025

¶25

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set ex-parte on 20.17.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶26

The Applicant Bank examined Sai pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager as AW-1 and marked 05 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.05.

¶27

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

¶28

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶29

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA aqainst the Defendants?

¶30

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.05 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶31

In the result, the present Original Application No.64712025 is allowed as under: -

¶32

i) The Defendants are jolntly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.28,68,057.81ps with future interest @12.01o/o p.a. simple, fA)m the date of application till the date ot reatization'fiffiir*

¶33

OA.No.64712025

¶34

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

¶35

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate according ly.

¶38

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno., transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 11th day of February, 2026).

¶39

.7nr--.., /{"tu* (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Gandamalla Janakiram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. v. Mr. Gandamalla Janakiram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Bank versus M/s. Forrit Projects Private Limited.

Indian Bank versus M/s. Mahalakshmi Marketing.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Pennugonda Ravi Chandra

Bank of India versus M/s. Parvathi Wlccs Ltd.

Icici Bank Limited versus Pasupuleti Nagarjuna

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Star Gym Fitness