Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s. Capital Protection Private Limited.

DRT24 Mar 2026OA/792/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by ICICI Bank Limited for the recovery of Rs. 1,52,43,125/-, future interest, and costs from the defendants jointly and severally, along with rights to sell the hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,52,43,125/- with future interest at 24% p.a. and costs; sale of hypothecated vehicle; execution against persons and properties of defendants.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/s. Capital Protection… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II^{AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF IYARCH, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SH. RAIVIESHWAR KOTHE,^{B.COM.,L,LB. (HONS.), M.A.} PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO: 792 0F 2025

¶5

ICICI BA NK LiMited., ICICI Bank Towers, Financial^District Plot No.12, Na nakaramguda, Gachibowli Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy^District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

1, M/s. Capital Protection^{PrivateLimited.,} Stilt 1st & 2nd Floor, 1-98/5/5,^{Plot No.} 326119, Patrika^{Nagar,Survey No.80 to} 84, Madhapur,^{Nalgonda-508116,TG.}

¶9

Amardeep Kumar Feel Good Homes,^Gandamguda Peeramcheru, Near^{DiscoverySchool} Ranga reddy - 500091,^TG.

¶10

. .. Defendants

¶11

Counsel for the^APP|icant

¶12

: Mr. G. Adrlan Kiran^Raj

Defenda nts

: Ex-parte

::^qLD..]LL ::

The Appllcant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.1,52,43,125/-^{from the defendants jointlyand} severally with future^{interest@24olo p.a. with monthlyrests} from the date of^{application till the date of realizationalong} with costs and^{in defaultfor saleof hypgthecated. vehicle'} CYo"

¶17

oA.NO.7921202s

¶18

Summons served on D1 and 2 through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 05.12.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶19

The Applicant Bank examined Kalva Raja yaswanth, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 26 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.26.

¶20

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

¶21

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶22

Whether the Applicant Bank is entiiled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicle?

¶23

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex_parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to 4.26 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 Appricant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶24

In the result, the present Original Application No.792/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶25

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severaily liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.t,52,43,L25l- with futurejnterest @B% AW.*

¶26

oA.NO.792l2025

¶27

p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶31

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

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly,

¶33

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. (Dictated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me ln the open court on this the 24rr, Day of March, 2026).

¶34

.,, !r..,, ..^....

¶35

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s. Capital Protection Private Limited.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/s. Capital Protection Private Limited.

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd., versus Priyanka Mahajan

Poreddy Malla Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

Mukkera Thirupathi Reddy versus Hdfc Bank

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Mrs. Daravat Sali

S R Trading Company versus Icici Bank Limited

M/s. Asset Reconstruction Company Limited versus Sailesh Kumar Gujjar