Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Munjeti Chiranjeevi

DRT6 Mar 2026OA/759/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte Original Application filed by a bank for recovery of dues secured by mortgage, the court held that the defendants are liable to pay the claimed sum along with future interest and costs, allowing the application and issuing a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 99,00,617/- with future interest; application allowed; recovery certificate issued; cost memo filed within 2 weeks.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Munjeti Chiranjeevi — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 759 OF 2025

¶4

BANK OF MAHAMSHTRA, Kukatpally Branch, Hyderabad, T.S. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory

¶5

.....Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

MT. MUNJETI CHIRANJEEVI, S/o. Munjeti Gouri Naidu, R/o. Flat No. 504, Fifth Floor, "SPRING MEADOWS", Plot Nos. 152, 153, !54, 167, 158 and 159, In Sy. Nos. 113/1 and 113/2, Gachibowli Vitlage, Under GHMC Serllingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State,

¶8

Also at:

¶9

MT. MUNJETI CHIRANJEEVI, S/o. Munjeti Gouri Naidu, R/o. C/o. Abdul Kadhar, No. 25-40, V.R.R. Nagar, Quthbullapur, Ranga Reddy District - 500055, Telangana State

¶10

Mrs. MUNJETI SWARNALATHA W/o. Munjeti Chiranjeevi, R/o. Flat No. 504, Fifth Floor, "SPRING MEADOWS", Plot Nos. 752, 1,53, L54, 167, 158 and 159, Plot Nos. 113/1 and 113/2, Gachibowli Village, Under GHMC Serilingampally Circle, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State.

¶11

Also at: ' Mrs. MUNIETI SWARNALATHA W/o. Munjeti Chiranjeevi, f* ., ' -'' : ..N b'?

¶12

oA.NO.7s9l202s

¶13

.. Defendants

¶14

R/o. H.No. 28-L49lt/A, Vasathi Navya APartments, Road No. 4, Maruthi^{Nagar,Balanagar,} Medchal-Malkajgiri^District -^500037, Telangana State

¶15

Counsel for the^APP|icant

¶16

: M/s. Momin Mohammed^Rafiq

¶17

Counsel for the Defendants

¶18

: Ex-pafte

¶19

:: ORDER ::

¶20

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs. 99,00,6t71-^{with future [email protected]/op.d. from} the date of application till^{the date of realization along with} costs and, in default,^{sale of OA mortgage property.}

¶21

Summon served on^{Defendants 1 & 2 through paper publication} and were set exparte on^{09.01 .2A26 as called absent and no} representation.

¶22

The Applicant Bank^{examined Mr. K.V.S. Shastry, Chief} Manager, as AW-1 and^{marked 14 documentsthrough him as} Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.14.

¶23

Heard ex-parte arguments from the^{Ld. Counsel of the} Applicant Bank. Perused^{the materialplaced on record.}

¶24

The point that arises for consideration^{is: -}

¶25

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA^moftgage r. property, fiff

¶26

¶27

oA.NO.7s9l2025

¶28

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs.A.1 to A.14 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the present Original Application No,75912025 is allowed as under: -

¶30

i) The Defendants 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum Rs. 99,00,617/_ with future interest @9.45olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entiUed for the costs.

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communlcate a copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶38

(Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by this the 5th Day of March, 2026).

¶39

( DING OFFICER

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Munjeti Chiranjeevi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Munjeti Chiranjeevi

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

Canara Bank versus M/s. Pp Engineering

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s Sunkari Apparao Gold Spot

Ayyanna It Park LLP Rep by P Sreedhar versus State Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Mugala Suprita

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Vikas Agarwal

State Bank of India versus Sri Jagannath Industries