Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Eligeti Satheesh Kumar

DRT22 Apr 2026OA/930/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues against two defendants. Upon an ex-parte hearing where the defendants did not appear, the Tribunal found the claim established by evidence and awarded the principal amount, future interest, costs, and recovery of hypothecated vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,12,238 with future interest at 10% p.a., costs, and authorization to proceed against hypothecated vehicles.

Icici Bank Limited versus Eligeti Satheesh Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TR]BUNAL.II^{AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22NO DAY OF APRIL,²⁰²⁶

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION^NO: 930^{OF 2025}

¶5

ICICI Bank Llmited., Gachibowli, ICICI Towers,^{Serilingampally} Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶6

,....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Eligeti Sathish^{Kumar, S/o, Eligeti} Kanakamma, Age 34^{Years, Occ: Self} Employee, H.No.3-1 12,^2611,Bheem Reddy Colony,^{R/o. BodupPal, Near} Hanuman Temple, Ghakesar^Mandal Hyderabad-500092,^{Telangana State.}

¶9

Mrs. Vinodha Anumala,^{D/o. Anumala} Age Major, Occ: Self^EmPloyee H.No.3-112, 2611,^Bheem Reddy Colony, R/o.^{BodupPal, Near} Hanuman TemPle,^{GhakesarMandal} " 'Defendants

¶10

Hyderabad-500092,^Telangana State.

¶11

: M/s. M. V. KINI Counsel for the Applicant

Defendants

: Ex-Parte

:: Q-LLLL ::

The Applicant Bank^{filed the present OA for the recovery a total} sum of Rs.28,12,2381-^{as on 06.09.2025fromthe defendants} jointly and severally with future lnterest @24olo^{p awith} monthly rests from 07.09.2025^{till the date of realizationalong} with costs and^{in default for sale of hypothecated vehicles'}

¶16

oA.NO.930/2025

¶17

Summons served on D1 and 2 through^{paper publication.They} were set ex-parte on 23.02.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined K. Raja Yashwanth, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 10 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.10.

¶19

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

¶20

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶21

Whether the Applicant Bank is entitled for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA hypothecated vehicles?

¶22

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.10 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jolntly and severally liable to pay the OA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present Original Apptication No.930/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.28 'L2,238/ - with frql're inter.est @1Oo/o ffi*'*

¶25

oA.NO.930/2025

¶26

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

¶27

ii) the OA claim is secured by way of 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 debu

¶28

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

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶30

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

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the^parties concerned. {Dictated^{to thesteno, corrected,signedand pronounced by me in the open court on} this the 22'd Day ofApril, 2026).

¶33

/frV,*.llt-Y, I t./ (RhfESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Icici Bank Limited v. Eligeti Satheesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Eligeti Satheesh Kumar

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

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/s. D G Enterprises.

Union Bank of India versus Boyapati Mahesh

State Bank of India versus Samama Aufaqui

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Ssp Water Supply.

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus M/s. Mythri Techno Solutions Private Limited

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Kommu Rambabu