Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Haneesh Babu Vuyyuru

DRT24 Aug 2026TA/6/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's transfer application (OA), holding the defendants jointly and severally liable to repay aousing loan dues with interest, costs, and mortgage enforcement against secured properties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to defendants to jointly and severally pay the claimed sum with interest and costs; authorization for sale of mortgage property service of recovery certificate. Costs directed to be filed wi

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Haneesh Babu Vuyyuru — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST,²⁰²⁶

¶3

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

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

TRANSFER APPLICATION No: 06^{OF 2026}

¶6

Bank of Ma harashtra., Champapet Branch, Hydera bad Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶7

.....Applicant.

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. Haneesh Babu VuYYuru S/o. Rama Mohan^{Rao, Sex:Male} Aged 37 Years, Occ:^{Business, R/o.} Plot No. 581 and 582,^{Flat No.T-3} Sai Lakshmi^{Residency, NearHDFC ATM} Pragathinagar,^KukatPallY

¶10

Hyderabad, Telangana -^500072'

¶11

Smt. Vuyyuru Devasena w/o. Mr. Haneesh^{BabuVuyyuru,Sex: Female} , Aged 36 Years,^{Occ: Housewife,R/o. Plot No' 581} anO SAZ, Flat^{No.T-3, Sai LakshmiResidency} Near HDFC^{ATM,Pragathinagar, Kukatpally} Hyderabad,^Telangana -^500072.

¶12

...Defendants

¶13

Counsel for^{the APPlicant}

¶14

: M/s. Momin^{MohammedRafiq}

Defenda nts

: Ex-parte

::^qLqlE&::

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA for the recoverya total} sum of Rs.1,33,A4,641t-^{i'e, a sum of Rs' 1' 19'30'594/-} towards^{HousingLoanwith future interest @8 75olo p'a' and a} sum of^{Rs.14,54,O471-towads Hoj{singL9an.with future}

1/'(s*

TA.NO.06/2026

interest @9.60010 p.a. from the defendants jointly and severally with monthly rests along with penal interest @2yo p.a. from the date of application till the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of TA schedule property.

¶23

Summons served on D1 and through paper publication. They were set ex-parte on 17.08.2026 as called absent and no representation.

¶24

The Applicant Bank examined Alvakonda M V Ramachandran, Legal Manager, as AW-1 and marked 22 documents through him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A.22.

¶25

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

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

whether the Appticant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the TA against the Defendants and TA schedule property?

¶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.22 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are joinuy and severally tiable to pay the TA claim to the Applicant Bank with future interest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the present Transfer Application No.O6l2026 is allowed as under: - @ry...*rV

¶30

TA.NO.o5l2026

¶31

¶32

i) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.1,33,84,64L/- i.€., a sum of Rs.1,19,30,594/- towards Housing Loan and a sum of Rs.14,54,047/- towards Housing Loan; with future interest @8.75olo p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶33

ii) the TA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule annexed to the TA and the applicant bank is entitled to proceed against the same to realise its debt;

¶34

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

¶35

iv) the applicant bank is entitled for the costs.

¶36

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

¶37

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶38

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 August, 2026).

¶39

(fu6*x

¶40

lnln(rsHwnR^KorHE) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Haneesh Babu Vuyyuru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mr. Haneesh Babu Vuyyuru

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

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mrs. Bonasi Rajitha

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Gulli Stephen

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Swarna Sunil Kumar

Canara Bank versus Gowtham Polymers

Uco Bank versus M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Pharma.

Mr Krishna Datta Sastry Addepalli versus Axis Bank