Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Raygonda Baburao Patil

DRT27 Jun 2023OA/228/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune, adjudicated an original application by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues amounting to approximately Rs.1.43 crore from three respondents, comprising a borrower and two guarantors. The Tribunal allowed the application, directed payment of principal and future interest at reduced rates, and authorized the sale of mortgaged agricultural land.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal dues plus future interest at reduced rates; directive to secure loan by sale of mortgaged agricultural land; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Raygonda Baburao Patil — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on: 27.01.2022 Registered on: 30.03.2022 Decided on: 27.06.2023 Duration: Y M D 1 5 0

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.228/2022

¶3

Union Bank of India,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 and branch office at various places including a Branch Office at: Patil Bldg., Near Grampanchayat, Mhaisal, Taluka Miraj, Dist. Sangli, PIN-416 409.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Raygonda Baburao Patil,

¶8

Mrs. Sharmila Raygonda Patil,

¶9

Mr. Shivam Raygonda Patil, All Residing at: Patil Niwas, Gavardewadi, Vitthal Nagar, Bedag, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, PIN-416 409.

¶10

… Defendants

¶11

APPEARANCES

¶12

For the Applicant Mr. VSSP Sarma - Advocate For Defendants Ex parte

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 1 of 8

[ npb ]

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.1,43,34,558/-

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

(Delivered on 27^th June, 2023)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present Application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.1,43,34,558/- the details of which are as under:

¶20

Rs.1,16,22,632/- in respect of Long Term Agriculture Loan account together with future interest @11.15% p.a. with half yearly rests thereon;

¶21

Rs.26,00,454/- in respect of Short Term Agriculture Loan account together with future interest @9.45% p.a. with half yearly rests thereon and

¶22

Rs.1,11,472/- in respect of Covid Emergency Line of Credit account together with future interest @8% p.a. with half yearly rests thereon

¶23

from 27^th January, 2022 till full repayment/realization of entire dues from defendant Nos.1 to 3.

¶24

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶25

The defendant No.1 being Farmer approached the applicant Bank on 02^nd June, 2015 for sanction of Long Term Agriculture Loan for purchase of 3.76 Hectares agricultural land and Short Term Agriculture Loan to meet cultivation

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 2 of 8

[ npb ]

expenses of 2.00 Hectares of Grapes and 1.60 Hectares of Banana. Defendant Nos.2 and 3 stood as guarantors for the said loans.

¶30

The applicant Bank considered the request and sanctioned and disbursed the Long Term Agriculture Loan of Rs.1,00,00,000/- on 26^th June, 2015 with interest @12.75% p.a. with half yearly rests and Short Term Agriculture LoanCC AGR (Crop Loan) on 01^st July, 2015, with interest @12.50% p.a. with half yearly rests, under the scheme of “Estate Purchase”.

¶31

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed loan transaction and security documents as set out in paragraph Nos.5.3 and 5.4 of the Original Application.

¶32

The applicant Bank contended that defendant No.1 again approached it on 28^th December, 2017 for enhancement of existing limit of Long Term Agriculture Loan and Short Term Agriculture Loan for which defendant nos.1 to 3 executed continuing documents as set out in paragraph No.5.6 of the Original Application.

¶33

The applicant Bank further contended that both these credit facilities were further renewed on 01^st March, 2019

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 3 of 8

[ npb ]

and 28^th February, 2020.

¶38

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant No.1 once again approached on 16^th July, 2020 for sanction of Covid Emergency Credit Line of Rs.1,00,000/- which was sanctioned with interest @8% p.a. with moratorium of 6 months. Defendant No.1 executed loan transaction and security documents as mentioned in paragraph Nos.5.11 and 5.12 of the Original Application.

¶39

The applicant Bank further contended that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, defendant No.1 failed to repay the installments with interest. Therefore, the applicant Bank classified the account of defendant No.1 as Non-Performing Asset on 01^st August, 2021 as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India.

¶40

Thereafter, on 26^th October, 2021 the applicant Bank through its Advocate issued Demand Notice calling upon defendant Nos.1 to 3 to repay the dues. Despite issuance of Demand Notice, defendants failed to repay the dues.

¶41

Hence, this application is filed.

¶42

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 4 of 8

[ npb ]

vide Order dated 09^th February, 2023 below the Application (Exhibit-1).

¶47

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Suryaji Balvant Sankpal, Senior Manager, which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶48

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/47) 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 relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets. Therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 5 of 8

[ npb ]

be granted.

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.15% p.a. with half yearly rests for Long Term Agriculture loan account; @9.45% p.a. with half yearly rests for Short Term Agriculture Loan account and 8% p.a. for Covid Emergency Line of Credit account. However, considering facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple) for Long Term and Short Term Agriculture Loan accounts and 8% p.a. (simple) for Covid Emergency Line of Credit account, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶57

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(A) Original Application No.228/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶60

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank towards Long Term Agriculture Loan account the sum of Rs.1,16,22,632/- (Rupees One Crore Sixteen Lakhs Twenty-Two Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty-

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 6 of 8

[ npb ]

Two only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 27^th January, 2022 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶65

(C) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank towards Short Term Agriculture Loan account the sum of Rs.26,00,454/- (Rupees Twenty-Six Lakhs Four Hundred and Fifty-Four only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 27^th January, 2022 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶66

(D) Defendant No.1 shall pay to the applicant Bank towards Covid Emergency Line of Credit account the sum of Rs.1,11,472/- (Rupees One Lakh Eleven Thousand Four Hundred and Seventy-Two only) with future interest @8% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 27^th January, 2022 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this

(OA No.228/2022)

Page 7 of 8

[ npb ]

operative order.

(E) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of immovable property i.e. All that pieces or parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 3.76 Hectare bearing Gat No.228 (P) situated at Village Narwad, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, more particularly mentioned in The Second Schedule of Hypothecation Agreement dated 10^th July, 2015.

¶72

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

¶73

(G) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶74

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

¶75

Sd/- (Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 27.06.2023 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶76

(OA No.228/2022)

¶77

Page 8 of 8

¶78

[ npb ]

Union Bank of India v. Raygonda Baburao Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Raygonda Baburao Patil

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

Union Bank of India versus Raygonda

Bank of Maharashtra versus Abhijeet

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sanjay Tambile

Punjab National Bank versus Shree Sony Elevators Prop Mr. Dinesh Yashwant Desale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sudhir Chunekar

Indian Overseas Bank versus Nitin Saluke