Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Subhash Mandavkar

DRT17 Aug 2023OA/124/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Maharashtra's application for recovery of dues against four defendants. The court reduced penal interest and modified the future interest rate to 9% per annum simple interest, ordering respondents to pay principal amounts with future interest secured by mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pay adjusted principal dues to the applicant bank along with future interest @9% per annum; sale of mortgaged properties authorized for recovery; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Subhash Mandavkar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on: 22.10.2021 Registered on: 24.12.2022 Decided on: 17.08.2023 Duration: Y M D 1 9 26

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer)

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.124/2022

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra

¶5

A Banking Company incorporated under The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970 having it’s Head Office at “Lokmangal” 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune – 5 and branch amongst other places at Ratnagiri City Branch, Ratnagiri.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Subhash Krishna Mandavkar Age: Adult, Occupation – Service R/at : (a) 790, Mandavkarwadi, Post Someshwar, Taluka & District: Ratnagiri 415 612. (b) S.No.67, Hissa No.2 at Post Someshwar, Taluka & District: Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶9

Mr. Mangesh Babu Nagvekar Age: Adult, Occupation: Business R/at: Post Someshwar, Taluka &

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 1 of 9

[KAUR]

District: Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶14

3 Mr. Pravin Manohar Nagvekar Age: Adult, Occupation: Business R/at: Post Someshwar, Taluka & District: Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶15

1. Mrs. Sujata Subhash Mandavkar Age: Adult, Occupation – Business R/at: (a) 790, Mandavkarwadi, Post Someshwar, Taluka & District: Ratnagiri 415 612. (b) S.No.67, Hissa No.2 at Post Someshwar, Taluka & District: …Defendants

¶16

Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶17

APPEARANCES For the Applicant For Defendants

¶18

Mr. Vallabh S Tokekar - Advocate Ex parte

¶19

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.85,06,578.69Ps

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

(Delivered on 17^th August, 2023)

¶22

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.85,06,578.69Ps. i.e. Rs.8,11,880.48Ps (Housing Loan) together with future interest thereon @10.90% per annum with monthly rests, Rs.36,21,782.85Ps(Agricultural Term Loan) together with future interest thereon @11.25% p.a. with monthly rests and Rs.40,72,915.36Ps (MKCC) together with future interest thereon @11.25% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of the

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 2 of 9

[KAUR]

Application i.e.22^nd October, 2021 till repayment/realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶27

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶28

Defendant No.1 as principal borrower approached the applicant bank for seeking financial assistance in the form of MKCC, Housing Loan and Agricultural. As per the loan applications of defendant No.1, applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the following loan/credit facilities from time to time. Defendant Nos.2 to 4 stood as guarantors for the credit facilities availed by defendant No.1 as detailed below:

¶29

Name of the	Amount	Date of	Guarantors
facility		Sanction
MKCC	Rs.50,000/-	13.11.2004	Defendant
			Nos.2 and 3
Housing	Rs.10,00,000/-	16.03.2012	Defendant
Loan			Nos.2 to 4
Agricultural	Rs.24,38,606/-	27.08.2015	Defendant
Term Loan			Nos.2 and 3.

¶30

The MKCC facility was enhanced from time to time. In

¶31

the year 2015 the said facility was enhanced upto Rs.21 lakhs.

¶32

It is further contended by the applicant Bank that defendants agreed to repay the credit facilities in following manner:

¶33

Facility	Repayment Schedule
MKCC of Rs.21,00,000/-	To be reviewed every year

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 3 of 9

[KAUR]

Housing Loan of	20 yearly installments of
Rs.10,00,000/-	Rs.5,50,000/- plus interest
	including four months moratorium from August, 2012.
Agricultural Term Loan	5 annual installments as per the
of Rs.24,38,606/-	Sanction Letter.

¶38

It is further contended by the applicant Bank that in order to secure the above mentioned credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan transaction and security documents including Hypothecation Agreements and Equitable Mortgage in respect of immovable property in favour of the applicant Bank as set out in the Original Application.

¶39

It is further contended by the applicant Bank that defendants have acknowledged the liability of repayment of loans by executing Balance and Security Confirmation Letters dated 14^th March, 2015, 27^th August, 2015, 13^th March, 2018, 25^th August, 2018, 12^th March, 2021 and 20^th August, 2021.

¶40

After availing and utilizing credit facilities, defendant borrower failed to repay the loan amounts as per terms of sanction. Consequently, accounts of defendant No.1 were classified Non-Performing Asset on 29^th November, 2019.

¶41

Thereafter, 16^th August, 2021 the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants and called upon them to pay the outstanding amount with interest. Despite service of Notice,

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 4 of 9

[KAUR]

defendants failed and neglected to comply with the demand in the said Notice.

¶46

Hence, this application is filed.

¶47

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 13^th January, 2023 passed below the Application (Exhibit01).

¶48

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Anand Dingankar, Chief Manager and relied upon the original loan transaction and security documents at Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/114 produced along with List (Exhibit-7) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶49

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶50

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶51

The applicant bank has claimed Penal Interest in the sum of Rs.718/- in Housing Loan facility, Rs.1,09,500/- in Agricultural Term Loan facility and Rs.1,03,424/- in MKCC facility as shown in Particulars of Claim. However, the same cannot be granted and it shall be deducted from the claim amount. Thus, the

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 5 of 9

[KAUR]

Housing Loan facility amount stands reduced from Rs.8,11,880.48Ps to Rs.8,11,162.48Ps (rounded off to Rs.8,11,162/-) , Agricultural Term Loan facility amount stands reduced from Rs.36,21,782.85Ps to Rs.35,12,282.85Ps (rounded off to Rs.35,12,283/-) and MKCC facility amount stands reduced from Rs.40,72,915.36Ps to Rs.39,69,491.36Ps (rounded off to Rs.39,69,491/-).

¶56

The applicant bank has claimed future interest @10.90% per annum with monthly rests for Housing Loan facility, @11.25% per annum with monthly rests for Term Loan facility and @11.25% per annum with monthly rests for MKCC facility. However, considering the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for all the facilities, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶57

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(A) Original Application No.124/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶60

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant bank towards Housing Loan facility the sum of Rs.8,11,162/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Eleven Thousand One Hundred and Sixty-Two only)

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 6 of 9

[KAUR]

with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 22^nd October, 2021 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶65

(C) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant bank towards Agricultural Term Loan facility the sum of Rs.35,12,283/- (Rupees Thirty-Five Lakhs Twelve Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty-Three only) with future interest @9 % per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 22^nd October, 2021 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶66

(D) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant bank towards MKCC facility the sum of Rs.39,69,491/- (Rupees Thirty-Nine Lakhs Sixty-Nine Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-One only) with future interest @9 % per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 22^nd October, 2021 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶67

(E) The aforesaid adjudicated amounts are secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of following

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 7 of 9

[KAUR]

immovable properties i.e.:

¶72

(A) All that piece and parcel of land lying, being and situated at Village Someshwar, Taluka and District Ratnagiri as under:

¶73

S.No./Gat No.	Area
66/11	0 Hector 46 Ares
67/1	0 Hector 77 Ares
67/2A	1 Hector 21 Ares

¶74

(B) All that piece and parcel of land and construction thereon area standing

¶75

admeasuring 1209 sq.ft lying being and situated at Survey No.67, Hissa No.2 area admeasuring 0-09-0 out of total area admeasuring 1-21-0 Hector, situated at Village Someshwar, Taluka and District Ratnagiri and within the limits of Someshwar Gram Panchayat.

¶76

(C) All that piece and parcel of land and constructed standing thereon, lying being and situated at Survey No.67, Hissa No.1 area admeasuring 0-77-0 Hector situated at Village Someshwar, Taluka and District Ratnagiri and within the limits of Someshwar Gram Panchayat.

(OA No.124/2022)

Page 8 of 9

[KAUR]

(F) The applicant is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶81

(G) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶82

(H) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶83

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date: 17.08.2023 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶84

(OA No.124/2022)

¶85

Page 9 of 9

¶86

[KAUR]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Subhash Mandavkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Subhash Mandavkar

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Santosh Pokade

Bank of Maharashtra versus Phadtare Fabtech Pvt. Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Shri. Mahesh Siddheshwar Manekar

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ms Swasti Aluminium Industry

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Shivratna Motors Propp Mr. Pramod Suresh Devkar

Union Bank of India versus Surshti Agro