Allowed

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Mutyala Chandrakala

DRT18 Mar 2026OA/65/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by YES Bank Limited for recovery of Rs. 20,34,900.47 along with interest and costs from the defendant, securing the claim via hypothecated vehicles and personal properties.

What did the court decide?

The respondent is directed to pay Rs. 20,34,900.47 with future interest, the bank is entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and personal properties, and a Recovery Certificate is to be issue

Yes Bank Limited. versus Mrs. Mutyala Chandrakala — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT^HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH,²⁰²⁶

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^NO: 65^{OF 2026}

¶4

YES Bank Limited., otfice at 1-8-387, 2No Floor, Agravansh i Plaza, HUDA Lane, S. P. Road, Secunderabad - 500003. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

...'.Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mrs. Mutyala Chandrakala, W/o. M, Chandra Shekar Reddy, Aged about 50^Years Occ: Business, R/o.Plot No.31,^Phase -² canesh Nagar, Ragannaguda, Rangareddy District - 501510.

¶8

AIso at:-

¶9

H. No.5-38, Buddonipally, Veldanda^Kotra lvlahaboobnagar District - 509360.

¶10

Also at:-

¶11

C/o. Nancy Traders, Plot^{No.2, Srinivasa} Rangapuram, Turkayamjal, Ragannaguda Ranga Reddy District - 501510

¶12

...Defendant

¶13

: Mr. M. Srlnivas Reddy Counsel for the Applicant

¶14

Defendant : Ex-parte

¶15

:: qLLq& ::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recoverya total} sum of Rs.20,3 4,900.47ps from the defendant with future interest @180/o p.a. compounded with^ monthly rests from Ow"

¶17

oA.NO.65/2026

¶18

L6.09.2025 till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicle.

¶19

Summon sent to sole defendant returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served and was set ex-parte on 17.03.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶20

The Applicant Bank examined Sai Pavan Gudivada, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 06 documents through him as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.06.

¶21

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

¶22

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶23

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

¶24

As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to 4.06 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.

¶25

In the result, the present Original Application No.65/2026 is allowed as under:^-

¶26

i) The Defendant is liable to^pay to^the Applicant Bank a sum ot Rs%t*9OO.47^ps &/'6v'o

¶27

oA.NO.6sl2026

¶28

¶29

with future interest @16.01o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

Communicate 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 the 18th Day of March,2026).

¶36

)\r\

¶37

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Mutyala Chandrakala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Limited. v. Mrs. Mutyala Chandrakala

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

The Yes Bank Limited. versus Mr. Eragoti Nagaraju

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Nancherla Srinivas Babu

M/S. Canara Bank versus Rajampet Bikes

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr Cns Labs Private Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus Morgula Kiran

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mir Ehtesham Ali