Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Kishore Kumar Manikonda

DRT12 Mar 2026OA/664/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank for recovery of home loan dues of Rs. 4.56 crore from three defendants who remained in default and were set ex parte due to no representation.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 4,56,26,874.67 with interest; claim secured by mortgage of OA schedule property; Recovery Certificate issued.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Kishore Kumar Manikonda — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB,^(HONS.), [4.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 664 OF 2025

¶5

Indian Overseas Bank., Governorpet Branch, 29-4-54K CSI TA B A S S Complex, Rama Chandra Rao Road, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh - 520002.

¶6

Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Kishore Kumar Manikonda S/o. Venkateswarlu, Age Major Gender Male, H. No.9-478/11 Plot No.401, Ananthalakshml Nilayam C R Colony, Chilakaluripeta Guntu r District, Andhra Pradesh-522616.

¶10

Saritha Ravilla, w/o.lY.Kishore Kumar, H. No.9-478/11, Plot No.401 Ananthalakshmi, Nilayam C R colony chilakaluripeta, Guntur Distrlct-522616.

¶11

Ravilla Narayanamma W/o. R. Malakondaiah, H. No.9-478/¹¹ Plot No.401, Ananthalakshmi Nilayam C R Colony, Chilakaluripeta Guntur District - 522616.

¶12

... Defendants

¶13

: Mr. Alluri Krishnam Raju Counsel for the Applicant Defenda nts ex_oarte1/ffi.ru

¶14

oA.NO.564/2025

¶15

:: oRDER ::

¶16

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.4,56,26,874.67ps towards Home Loan from the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @11.30o/o p.a. with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization arong with costs and in defaurt for sare of oA schedule property.

¶17

Summons served on D1 to 3. They were set ex_parte on 10.09.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Sunil Kumar Dogra, Chief Manager, as AW-1 and marked 13 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A. 13.

¶19

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

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:_

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶22

R As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A. 13 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinfly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the |g,plicant Bank with future interest and costs. AW^

¶23

oA.NO.664/202s

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.66412025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.4,56,26,874.67ps towards Home Loan with future interest @9.70o/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶29

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

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

r0. Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (Dlctated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12'h Day of March, 2026).

¶32

grb ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Indian Overseas Bank v. Kishore Kumar Manikonda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Kishore Kumar Manikonda

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

Thupakula Narasaiah versus Indian Bank

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Nand Kishor

Indian Bank versus M/s Systems Steels

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Shama Enterprises.

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Siva Rama Krishna Traders.

The Yes Bank Limited. versus M/s. Raghupati Enterprises.