Allowed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya

DRT3 Sept 2026OA/739/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In ex-parte proceedings, the DRT presiding officer held the defendants jointly and severally liable to repay the bank loan of Rs. 52,21,706.17 with future interest and costs, allowing an order for recovery and sale of hypothecated vehicles. No external author found.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 52,21,706.17 with future interest, allow hypothecated vehicles sale, and grant recovery certificate.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya — Money Laundering | DRT (2026)

¶1

]N THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE O3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 739 OF 2026

¶6

HDFC Bank Ltd.,

¶7

Having its office at D.No.40-304, Krishna Jyotsna Complex, Bhagyanagar, Kurnool-518002. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶8

.....Applicant.

¶9

Versus

¶10

Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya, D/o. Laxman Rao, Aged about 31 Years, Occ: Prop. Of Saharsa Diagnostics, Office at Nagireddy Colony. Hosanamandir, Kurnool-518401.

¶11

Also at: -

¶12

R/o. H. No.15-9- 12- 116, Maruthi Nagar Nandikotkur, Kurnool District - 518401.

¶13

Mr. Kammethkar Laxman Rao

¶14

S/o. K. Hanumantha Rao, Aged about 67 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.15-9-12-116 Maruthi Nagar, Nandikotkur, Kurnool District - 518401.

¶15

...Defendants

¶16

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. M. Srinivas Reddy

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: (LLLq& ::

The Applicant Bank filed the^present OA for the^{recovery a total} sum of Rs.52,2 7,706.L7ps from the defendants^{jointly and} severally with future interest @18o/o^p.a. from^{the date of}

%'-n*

oA.NO.73912026

application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated vehicles.

¶25

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set ex-parte 02.09.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶26

The Applicant Bank examined Adithya A S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 09 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.09.

¶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 entitted for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicles?

¶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.09 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy 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.739l2026 is allowed as under: -

¶32

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of ftffn^*

¶33

oA.NO.73912025

¶34

¶35

Rs.52,21,706.17ps with future interest @9.1%^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶36

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of

¶37

hypothecation of vehicles described in the schedule annexed to the OA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶38

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

¶39

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶40

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

¶41

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶42

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 03'd Day ofSeptember, 2026).

¶43

/ P-uq'ril-ri>^u.^' ESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

ol 7silax

2s.08.2026.

02.09.2026

03.09.2026

Applicant counsel present along with AW-1 Ms. Adithya A.S., Legal Manager, HDFC Bank ltd., filed evidence affidavit and Ex. A-1 to A-9 are marked and reported no further evidence. Take summons against the defendants. For filing POS call on 25.08.2026.

¶49

¶50

Applicant counsel present and submitted that summons sent to both defendants served as^per PTR. Postal receipts and PTR filed. No representation for defendants and hence called absent. Matter^placed before the Hon'ble PO for appropriate orders. call on 02.09.2026. M

¶51

Sri M Sai Kiran representing MSR counsel for applicant. Summons served on D1 and 2, called absent, no representation and set exparte. A1 to 09 already marked and reported no further AE. For exparte arguments, call on 03.09.2026.

¶52

{4v-P.O.

¶53

P.O.

¶54

Sri M Sai Kiran representing MSR counsel for^applicant submitted exparte arguments. Orders will be^passed during COUfSe. !'.-

¶55

P.O.

¶56

03.09.2026

¶57

Orders Pronounced, vide separate sheets.

¶58

In the result OA.No.739/2026 is allowed with^{costs. Issue} Recovery Certificate accordingly. , f - . ...: "" P.O.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Ms. Kameethkar Lavanya

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

Icici Bank Limited. versus M/s. Global Energy.

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Chakravarthy Hanumanthu

Canara Bank versus M/s. M Rs Fusion

Union Bank of India versus sri akshara girls hostel

Idbi Bank versus Venkatswamy

Yes Bank versus Sunseed Hospitals