Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Valmiki Bharat Babu

DRT18 Feb 2026OA/694/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a defaulted loan principal of Rs. 27.12 lakh plus future simple interest at 11.25% p.a. and costs, holding the defendant liable based on marked evidence following an ex-parte hearing.

What did the court decide?

A direction was issued for the issue of a recovery certificate against the defendant for the sum of Rs. 27,12,872/- with future simple interest at 11.25% p.a. and costs.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Valmiki Bharat Babu — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1BTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,2026

¶3

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

¶4

Original Application No: 694 OF 2025

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd., Having its Regional Office at ICICI Bank Tower, Plot No.12, Nanakramguda Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy - 500032, Telangana. Rep. by its Power of Attorney. .....Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sri. Valmiki Bharat Babu, S/o. Ramanjaneyulu Aged about 31 Years, Occ: Employee Resident of Flat No.202, Venkatalakshmi Nilayam, High Tension Road, Nizampet Hydernagar, Hyderabad - 500085.

¶8

...... Defendant

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Rajendera Prasad

Defendants

: Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the recovery of a total sum of Rs.27,12,872l- towards Loan A/c. No. LPHYDO0048976803 from the defendant with future interest @24o/o^p.a. with^monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realisation^along with costs.

¶14

Summon served on sole defendant through^{paper publication and} was set ex-parte on 30.10.2025 as called absent and^no representation. .l?,* -,. .r ' -,1:t*"

¶15

OA.No.694/202s

¶16

¶17

The Applicant Bank examined Kalva Raja Yaswanth, Area Relationship Manager as AW-1 and marked 07 documents through him as Ex. A. 1 to Ex. A.07.

¶18

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

¶19

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶20

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendant?

¶21

6, As stated supra, the Defendant remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.07 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.

¶22

In the result, the present Original Application No.694/2025 is allowed as under:^-

¶23

i) The Defendant is liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.27,t2,872/- towards Loan A/c. No. LPHYD0004B976B03 with future interest @11.25olo p.a. simple, from the date of application till the date of rea lization;

¶24

ii) the applicant bank is also entitled to proceed against the person and properties $ the.,,_defendant for realization of its dues; 1 ,i.):*

¶25

OA.No.694/2025

¶26

iii) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶27

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

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

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 18ih day of February, 2026).

¶30

,"/'ff6r'o'u (RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Valmiki Bharat Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Valmiki Bharat Babu

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

Ganesh Rajesh versus Yms Finance Private Limited

Gummadavelli Ganesh versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Turpu Ramesh versus Can Fin Homes Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Sri Venkateswara Agencies.

Punjab National Bank versus Shri Pulluri Sairam

Canara Bank versus M/s. Chandana Apparels