Allowed

State Bank of India v. Suhail Pagarkar

DRT27 Jul 2023OA/378/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of aggregated dues of approximately Rupees 40.53 Lakhs from the defendant, who failed to appear. The court reduced the claimed penal interest and directed future simple interest at 9% per annum, securing the amount via an equitable mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Defendant directed to pay Rs.40,53,319 with future interest at 9% per annum; amount secured by equitable mortgage; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Suhail Pagarkar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on: 12.03.2022 Registered on: 19.04.2022 Decided on: 27.07.2023 Duration: Y M D 1 4 15

¶2

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

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.378/2022

¶4

State Bank of India

¶5

A banking company constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having its corporate office at State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 and its branch at State Bank of India Vimannagar, Branch. Thereafter account migrated to State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Second Floor, “Wardhaman” Seven Loves Chowk, Plot No. 321/A/3, Mahatma Phule Peth, Pune – 411 042

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mr. Suhail Umar Pagarkar 9-B2. 1^st Floor, Pooja Apartment, Udhyam Nagar, Maruti Mandir, Taluka & Dist. Ratnagiri - 415639

… Defendant

(OA No.378/2022)

Page 1 of 6

[SRD]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant	Mrs. Sudha Koloti - Advocate
For Defendant	None(Exparte)

¶15

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.40,78,140/-

¶16

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 27^th July, 2023)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.40,78,140/- i.e. Rs.30,18,242/(Housing Loan) together with future interest thereon @9.55% per annum with monthly rests; Rs.53,951/- (Rin Suraksha Insurance) together with future interest thereon @9.50% per annum with monthly rests and Rs.10,05,947/- together with future interest thereon @9.55% per annum with monthly rests respectively, from 11^th March, 2022 till repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

Defendant approached the applicant Bank for seeking financial assistant for Home Loan and Home Loan Insurance Covers. Accordingly on 25^th September, 2012 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed two facilities i.e. Home Loan for an amount of Rs.23,00,000/- and Rs.56,733/- Funding of Home Loan Insurance cover to the defendant.

(OA No.378/2022)

Page 2 of 6

[SRD]

Defendant again approached applicant Bank for Top Up loan and accordingly applicant Bank sanctioned Top up loan for an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- to the defendant on 11^th July, 2016.

¶24

The defendants executed necessary loan transaction and security documents including Equitable Mortgage in favour of the applicant Bank as set out in paragraph Nos. 5.4, 5.6, 5.8, 5.9 and 5.10 of the Original Application.

¶25

The applicant Bank contended that defendant initially was regular in repayment of loan but later in 2018 became irregular. The applicant Bank personally called the defendant and also sent number of reminders for repayment of loan amount. In spite of all the reminders defendant failed to regularize the loan account. Thus, the accounts were classified as Non-Performing Asset on 28^th June, 2018.

¶26

The applicant Bank issued Recall Notice on 12^th January, 2022 to the defendant to repay the entire amount due under loan account. But the defendant failed to comply with the same. The applicant Bank therefore compelled to file this Original Application for the recovery of its dues under loan accounts.

¶27

Hence, this application is filed.

¶28

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against him vide order dated 3^rd February, 2023 below Application.

(OA No.378/2022)

Page 3 of 6

[SRD]

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Ms. Neha Hirlekar, Branch Manager and Principal Officer which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶33

The applicant Bank has also produced list of documents (Exhibit-7) thereby adducing in evidence the original loan transaction and security documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1/1 to AW1/25 which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶34

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

¶35

Since the defendant 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.

¶36

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9.55% per annum with monthly rests for Housing Loan account and Top up loan account and @9.50% per annum with monthly rests for Rin Suraksha Insurance loan account respectively. However, considering the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) to the all Loan accounts, it would be just and reasonable.

¶37

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.23,821/which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim

(OA No.378/2022)

Page 4 of 6

[SRD]

amount of Rs.40,78,140/- reduced to Rs.40,53,319/-

¶42

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(A) Original Application No.378/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶45

(B) Defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank towards Housing Loan, Rin Suraksha Loan and Top up loan account respectively the aggregate sum of Rs.40,53,319/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Fifty-Three Thousand Three Hundred Nineteen only) with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 12^th March, 2022 till payment/realization of the amounts mentioned in this operative order.

¶46

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by valid and subsisting Equitable Mortgage i.e. Flat No. G/01 and G/02 (admeasuring area 1006 Sq. Feet) on Stilt Upper Ground Floor, in Building No. A/06/ Scheme No. 03 in Sai Bhoomi Nagar, situated at land bearing No. 22 Hissa No. 3 and out of S. No. 6B, Hissa No. 1B/9, village Tiwandewadi, within the limits of ground Grampanchyat Shirgaon and Madhaliwadi, Mirzole, Taluka and District Ratnagiri, more

(OA No.378/2022)

Page 5 of 6

[SRD]

particularly described in paragraph No. 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10 of the Original Application.

¶51

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

¶52

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶53

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

¶54

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place: Pune Presiding Officer Date: 27.07.2023 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶55

(OA No.378/2022)

¶56

Page 6 of 6

¶57

[SRD]

State Bank of India v. Suhail Pagarkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Suhail Pagarkar

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

Union Bank of India versus Office of Official Liquidator (Siddheshwar Industries Private Limited)

Bank of Maharashtra versus Uttam

Bank Of Baroda versus Aaj Ka Anand Papers Ltd.

Mr Suhas Abhimanyu Shinde versus the Muslim Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Pandurang Ramchandra Kale versus Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank

State Bank of India versus Ketan Vinod Kadam