Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Dnyandev Shinde

DRT13 Jul 2023OA/454/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant Bank of Maharashtra's recovery application against the principal borrower and guarantors for defaulted loans, reducing the claim amount and adjusting the interest rate to 9% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Order allows application; respondents to pay Rs.23,40,226/- with 9% p.a. future interest; proceeds from mortgaged properties to apply to dues; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dnyandev Shinde — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on: 17.03.2020 Registered on: 20.05.2022 Decided on: 13.07.2023 Duration: Y M D 3 3 26

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.454/2022

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra,

¶4

A body corporate established under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970 having its Registered Office at 1501 “Lokmangal”, Shivajinagar, Pune and of its branch office at Lasurne Branch, amongst other places of India.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Dnyandev Narayan Shinde, Adult, Occ: Agriculture, Residing at-425 A, Primary School Bhise Vasti, Bori, Taluka-Indapur, District-Pune-413 104.

¶8

Shri Gunavant Narayan Shinde, Adult, Occ: Agriculture, Residing at-425 A, Primary School Bhise Vasti, Bori, Taluka-Indapur, District-Pune-413 104.

¶9

Shri Bhagwan Narayan Shinde, Adult, Occ: Agriculture, Residing at-425 A, Primary School

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 1 of 8

[ npb ]

Bhise Vasti, Bori, Taluka-Indapur, District-Pune-413 104.

¶14

… Defendants

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

For the Applicant	Mr. Ramesh B. Ganbote - Advocate
For Defendants	Exparte

¶17

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.23,40,701/-

¶18

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 13^th July, 2023)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present Application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.23,40,701/i.e. Rs.17,13,638/- in respect of Crop Loan account and Rs.6,27,063/- in respect of Term Loan account together with future interest @14.65% p.a. with monthly rests thereon from 17^th March, 2020 till full repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

The defendant No.1 is the principal borrower and defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the guarantors for credit facilities granted to defendant No.1.

¶22

In or about May, 2014, the defendant Nos.1 to 3 approached the applicant Bank for Crop Loan of Rs.12,00,000/- to defendant No.1. Defendant Nos.2 and 3

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 2 of 8

[ npb ]

offered themselves as guarantors for securing the Crop Loan.

¶27

On 23^rd June, 2014 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed Crop Loan of Rs.12,00,000/- to defendant No.1, with interest @12.65% p.a. with half yearly rests, under Mahabank Kisan Credit Card.

¶28

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed the loan transaction and security documents as mentioned in paragraph No.5.5 of the Original Application.

¶29

The applicant Bank contended that defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed Balance and Security Confirmation Letters dated 20^th June, 2017 and 30^th September, 2018 and confirmed the balance in Crop Loan account of defendant No.1.

¶30

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant Nos.1 to 3 again approached the applicant Bank in May, 2016 and requested for Term Loan of Rs.8,00,000/- for purchase of tractor unit along with sprayer to defendant No.1. Defendant Nos.2 and 3 offered themselves as guarantors for securing the Term Loan also.

¶31

On 21^st June, 2016 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Term Loan of Rs.8,00,000/- to defendant

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 3 of 8

[ npb ]

No.1. The Term Loan was to carry interest @12.65% p.a. with half yearly rests and repayable in 7 equal yearly installments of Rs.1,15,000/- with interest.

¶36

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed loan transaction and security documents as set out in paragraph No.5.11 of the Original Application.

¶37

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant No.1 has also executed E-Karar on 27^th June, 2016 for securing Term Loan thereby created charge in favour of the applicant Bank in respect of the charged immovable properties at Gat No.139 admeasuring 01H 96R and Gat No.236 admeasuring 00H 48R more particularly mentioned in paragraph No.5.13 of the Original Application. The said Declarative Mortgage is duly registered with Sub Registrar Office, Indapur on 27^th June, 2016.

¶38

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant Nos.1 to 3 executed Balance and Security Confirmation Letter dated 03^rd July, 2019 and confirmed the balance in Term Loan account of defendant No.1.

¶39

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant No.1 failed to pay the installments in the Term Loan

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 4 of 8

[ npb ]

account and also failed to pay interest in the Crop Loan account and committed breach of the sanction terms. Resultantly, the accounts of defendant No.1 have become Non-Performing Asset as per Reserve Bank of India norms.

¶44

The applicant Bank followed up with defendants by personal visits and telephonic calls and reminders for repayment. However, defendants failed to pay the installments and interest or regularize the accounts of defendant No.1.

¶45

Hence, this application is filed.

¶46

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide order dated 16^th March, 2023 passed below the application (Exhibit-1).

¶47

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri James David Pereira, Chief 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-1/17) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 5 of 8

[ npb ]

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

¶53

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.

¶54

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 be granted.

¶55

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.475/- in Term Loan account as shown in Particulars of Claim at Paragraph No.5.19 of the Original Application. However, the same cannot be granted and this amount shall be deducted from total claim amount. Thus, the total claim amount stands reduced from Rs.23,40,701/to Rs.23,40,226/-.

¶56

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @14.65% p.a. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple)

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 6 of 8

[ npb ]

for both the loan accounts, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶61

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶62

ORDER

¶63

(A) Original Application No.454/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶64

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank the aggregate sum of Rs.23,40,226/- (Rupees Twenty-Three Lakhs Forty Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty-Six only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 17^th March, 2020 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶65

¶66

a) All that piece and parcel of Gat No.139 admeasuring 01 Hector 96 Aar assessed at Village Birangudwadi, Taluka-Indapur, within the limits of Registration District Pune,

(OA No.454/2022)

Page 7 of 8

[ npb ]

Sub Registration District Indapur, DistrictPune and

¶71

b) All that piece and parcel of Gat No.236 admeasuring 00 Hector 48 Aar at Village Bori, Taluka-Indapur, within the limits of Registration District Pune, Sub Registration District Indapur, District-Pune,

¶72

more particularly mentioned in paragraph No.5.13 of the Original Application.

¶73

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

¶74

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶75

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

¶76

Sd/- (Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 13.07.2023 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶77

(OA No.454/2022)

¶78

Page 8 of 8

¶79

[ npb ]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Dnyandev Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Dnyandev Shinde

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

Hdfc Bank versus M/S Shri Avinash Annasaheb Musale, Prop. Mr. Avinash Annasaheb Musale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sudhir Chunekar

Indian Overseas Bank versus Nitin Saluke

Indian Overseas Bank versus Bhauso Kare

Bank Of Baroda versus Aaj Ka Anand Papers Ltd.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Uttam