Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Mrs. Kuchikulla Shravya

DRT15 Jul 2026OA/786/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues. Defendants were set ex-parte for default in appearance. The court held defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed sum with interest and costs, secured by mortgage properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.66,98,411/- with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against mortgaged property and defendants' person/properties for realization; costs awarded

Bank of Baroda versus Mrs. Kuchikulla Shravya — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-]I AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No: 786 OF 2025

¶5

Bank of Baroda., Begumpet Wanch, 6-3- L278 / 2/ I Street No.6, Plot No.77, Uma Nagar Kunda nbagh, Begumpet, Hyderabad Telangana - 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mrs. Kuchikulla Shravya, D/o. Late Kuchikulla Ajay Kumar Reddy C/o. Kuchikulla Sujatha, Age 33 Years Gender Fe-Male, Occ: Software, H.No 76-7-3O/e, A V Residency, Flat No.201 Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana-500059.

¶9

Smt. Kuchikulla Sujatha, W/o. Late Kuchikulla Ajay Kumar Reddy, Age 62 Years Gender Fe-Male, Occ: Housewife, H.No 76-t-3O/E, A V Residency, Flat No.504 Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana-500059.

¶10

M/s. High Rise Constructions., Rep by its their Managing Partner Mr. A. Narsimha Reddy, Office Address At 11-13-1205/8, Plot No.227, Road No.9 Vasavi Colony, Kothapet, Saroornagar Hyderabad - 500036.

¶11

Mr. A. Narsimha Reddy, S/o. Late A Goverdhan Reddy, Age 45 Years Occ: Managing Director, Gender Male Address at Flat No.505, Hanuman Residency Anand Na9ar, Malakpet, Hyderabad-500036,

"Derendants M"

oA.NO.786/2025

Counsel for the Applicant

: Mr. V. Ekantha Rao

Defendants

:Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.66,98,411/- frcm the defendants jointly and severally with future interest @18o/o p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and ln default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶21

Summons served on D3, whereas summons sent to D4 returned with endorsement refused hence, deemed to be served. They were set ex-parte on 2O.1t.2025 as called absent and no representation. Summons served on D1 through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 26.02.2026 as calted absent and no representation. WS of D2 not filed hence, D2 right was forfeited and was set ex-parte on 24-04.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶22

The Applicant Bank examined Ambati Anand Kumar, Senior Manager, as AW-1 and marked 19 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.19.

¶23

Applicant right of arguments is forfeited vide docket order dated 74.07.2026 for no representation.^perused the material placed 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 schedule property?

¶26

oa.No,7a6lzo25

¶27

¶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.19 marked on behalf of the Applicant^Bank cllnches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the^Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future^interest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the^present Original Application No.786/2025^is allowed as under:^-

¶30

i) The Defendants are^jointly and severally liable to^pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.66,98,411/- with future interest @10.70vo 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 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^propertiesof defendants for realization of^lts dues;

¶33

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶34

The Applica nt Bank is directed to file Cost Memo wlthin^{2 weeks} from the date of v' 'e!!'PL receipt of this order. -" 2lo*, U/X*.*

¶35

oA.NO.786/2025

¶36

Issue Recovery Certlficate accordingly.

¶37

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 151' Day of July, 2025). ,tni. .

¶38

//y'..-1sYt' , u^- ,r"

¶39

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Mrs. Kuchikulla Shravya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Mrs. Kuchikulla Shravya

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. Kalyani Restaurant and Bar

Union Bank of India versus M/S Sameer Motors

The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Kalamkari Hand Drawn Sarees.

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Medha Coir Industries

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Masineni Bhargav

Standard Chartered Bank versus Sunila Devi Taparia and Another