Allowed

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Nand Kishor

DRT11 Mar 2026OA/981/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by a bank seeking recovery from two individuals. Ex-parte judgment held defendants jointly and severally liable for the debt secured by hypothecated vehicles, granting recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.59,18,083.64 with future interest; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicles and defendants' properties; recovery certificate issued.

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Nand Kishor — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD DATED THIS THE 1lTH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATiON NO^: 981 0F 2025

¶4

M/s. HDFC Bank Ltd., Having its office at # 1-10-60/3, 3rd Floor, 4A, Suryodaya Complex, Begum pet, Hyderabad - 500016. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

.... .Applica nt.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Nand Kishor, S/o. Muni Ram Age 49 Years, Occ: Not Known F. No.303,3'd Floor, Sri Raj Residency Kompalle, Ivledcha^I Malkajg iri - 500014.

¶8

Mohit Mohit, s/o. Nand Kishor F. No.303,3'd Floor, Srl^Rai Residency Kompalle,^Medchal lvlalkajgiri - 500014.

¶9

... Defenda nts

¶10

Counsel for the^APP|icant

: Dr. M. P. Kashyap

Defendants

:Ex-parte

::^qLLE-L ::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.59,18,083.64ps^{from the defendantsjointly and} severally wlth future^interest @18o/o^{p.a. from the date of} application till the^{date of realization aloriqwith costs and in} default for sale of^{hypothecated vehicles^W*}

¶16

oA.NO.981/202s

¶17

Summons served on D1 and 2. They were set ex-parte on 29.07.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶18

The Applicant Bank examined Adithya A S, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 05 documents through her as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.05.

¶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 enti ed 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.05 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 Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶23

In the result, the present Original Application No.gg1/2025 is allowed as under: -

¶24

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.59,18,083.64ps with future interest @9.51olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶25

oA.NO.981/202s

¶26

¶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 debt;

¶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 the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 11th Day of March,2025).

¶33

Ow* (Rfi(iESHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Nand Kishor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Nand Kishor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus M/s. Teknik Enterprises.

Canara Bank versus M/s. Sri Sai Silk Sarees.

Yes Bank Limited versus M/s. Satya Sai Transport

Union Bank of India versus Sundarapalli Venkataiah

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. versus Ms. Padal Bhavya

M/s. Yes Bank Limited. versus Ms. Tm Monica