Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sri Rama Retail Outlet

DRT24 Apr 2026OA/975/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-II at Hyderabad allowed Application No. 975/2025 filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 98,70,641.88 along with interest and costs, declaring the defendants jointly and severally liable.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs. 98,70,641.88 with interest at 10.75% p.a., secured by mortgage, and entitlement to proceed against property and assets.

Union Bank of India versus Sri Rama Retail Outlet — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.II AT HYDEMBAD

¶2

DATED THIS lHE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶3

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

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO: 975^{OF 2025}

¶5

Unlon Bank oF India., ( Erstwhile Andhra Bank) Ra manthapu r Branch, RamanthaPUr Hyderabad Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri^Dist Warangal Road, T.S - 500013. Rep. by its Authorized Slgnatory.

¶6

.....Applicant.

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s. Sri Rama Retail Outlet Rep by its Prop. lvlr. kashaPaka Venkata Satyendra Kumar,^H.No.6-62 Sy.No. 168, l.4alipuram^Village Thirumalagir N4andal, Suryapet^Dist T S - s08223.

¶9

lvlr. Kashapaka Venkata Satyendra Kumar, S/o. Rama Swamy

¶10

Mrs. K. Radhika,^{W/o. KashaPaka} Venkata Satyendra Kumar

¶11

D2 & 3:- R/o. H. No.3-8-429,^PlotNo.65 Road No.3, Suryodaya Colony Mansoorabad, Hyderabad,^TS -^500068.

¶12

AIso at:-

¶13

Rlo. 29-75A17/24, P No.24 R K Shyamala Enclave^{New Vidyanagar} Neredmet' TS - 500056

¶14

...Defendants

¶15

: Smt. M. Kanakadurga Counsel for the Applicant Defendants : Ex-parte

Aw*o

oA.NO.975/2025

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.98,70,641.88ps as on 19.08.2025 from the defendants^jointly and severally with future interest @10.75olo p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of OA schedule property.

¶20

WS not filed by D1 to 3 hence, their right was forfeited and were set ex-parte on 23.04,2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶21

The Applicant Bank examined K V Shiv Kumar, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 11 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.11.

¶22

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

¶23

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶24

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the OA against the Defendants and OA schedule property?

¶25

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz., Exs. A.1 to A.11 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the OA cli4l to the Applicant Bank with future interest ano ' Cosls// '/ '/tt\a-'--.*..!b _j,, --^,\J "

¶26

oA.NO.975l2025

¶27

¶28

In the result, the present Original Application No.975l2025 is allowed as under: -

¶29

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.98,70,641.88ps with future interest @10.75olo^p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶30

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;

¶31

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

¶32

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶33

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

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

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 24th Day of April, 2026).

¶36

A"'"*

¶37

(RAMESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. Sri Rama Retail Outlet

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sri Rama Retail Outlet

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

Indian Bank versus Mr. Shaik Ameer Bhasha

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Aaradhana Kanagala

M N Anjaiah versus Union Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/s. Dynamic Electronics

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Karthik Enterprises

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Inumula Jagannadham