Partly allowed

Bank of India v. Rohit Chaskar

DRT22 Dec 2023OA/991/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte recovery application, the Debts Recovery Tribunal awarded recovery of dues plus interest to the applicant bank but declined the prayer for sale of mortgaged property because the applicant admitted prior valid mortgages in favor of other respondents.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs.31,22,729/ along with future interest. Sale of property refused. Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of India versus Rohit Chaskar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

Presented on : 07.01.2022 Registered on : 20.08.2022 Decided on : 22.12.2023 Duration : Y M D 01 11 15

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 991/2022.

¶3

Bank of India,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its head office at Star House, C-5, G Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 and branch at – Fergusson College Road, 1201, C/A, Shivajinagar, Pune 411004.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Mr. Rohit Maruti Chaskar, Age 27 year, Occ. Service, R/o : (a) Flat No. 102, Namo Heights, S.No. 30/1, Near Zeel College, Narhe, Pune 411041 and

¶8

(b) Flat No.202, Namo Heights, S.No. 30/1, Near Zeel College, Narhe, Pune 411041 and (c) Chas, Tal.Ambegaon, Dist.Pune 410515.

¶9

2 Central Bank of India, Near Chakankar House, S.No. 146/8/1, Dhayari, Pune 411041.

(OA No. 991/2022)

Page 1 of 6

Sanap

3 Sharad Sahakari Bank Ltd., Market Yard, Manchar, Taluka Ambegaon, District Pune 410503.

¶14

.. Defendants

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

For Applicant Advocate Tejashri Y. Hirve. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶17

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.31,22,729/-

¶18

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 22^nd December, 2023)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.31,22,729/- (by rounding) together with future interest @8.80% per annum with monthly rests from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from defendant No.1.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶21

Defendant No.1 approached the applicant Bank with loan application for grant of Housing Loan of Rs.23,00,000/-. Defendant No.1 is Borrower and Mortgagor. As per the loan application of defendant No.1, applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Housing Loan of Rs.22,50,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 18.02.2016. The agreed rate of interest was 9.70% per annum with monthly rests.

(OA No. 991/2022)

Page 2 of 6

Sanap

In order to secure the aforesaid Housing Loan, defendant No.1 executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of mortgage of immovable property i.e. Flat No.202, 2^nd Floor, Namo Heights, S.No. 30/1, Near Zeel College, Narhe, Pune, more particularly described in Schedule I of the Original Application, in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant No.1 had also executed Acknowledgement of Debt/Securities on 02.06.2018 and 22.12.2020.

¶26

The applicant Bank contended that defendant No.1 had also availed Housing Loan of Rs.22,46,000/- from defendant No.2 by creating Equitable Mortgage on 30.01.2016. Defendant No.1 had also availed Housing Loan of Rs.21,00,000/- from defendant No.3 vide Mortgage Deed dated 29.03.2016. The applicant Bank is having prior, valid and legal charge on the mortgaged property. Therefore, the applicant Bank has prayed for declaration that defendant Nos.2 and 3 have no valid security interest/mortgages created in their favour with respect to mortgaged property described in Schedule-I of the Original Application.

¶27

The applicant Bank further contended that defendant No.1 committed defaults in payment of installments and failed

(OA No. 991/2022)

Page 3 of 6

Sanap

to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 07.05.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to defendant No.1. Despite service of Notice, defendant No.1 failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶32

Hence, this application is filed.

¶33

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 04.12.2023 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶34

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Ravikumar, Assistant General Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1/1 to AW-1/30 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶35

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

¶36

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank.

¶37

However, according to the applicant Bank itself defendant No.1 had also availed Housing Loan of

(OA No. 991/2022)

Page 4 of 6

Sanap

Rs.22,46,000/- from defendant No.2 by creating Equitable Mortgage on 30.01.2016 and Housing Loan of Rs.21,00,000/from defendant No.3 vide Mortgage Deed dated 29.03.2016. Thus, according to the applicant Bank itself same property is mortgaged with defendant Nos.2 and 3 and mortgage of the property in favour of defendant No.2 is prior to the mortgage of the property in favour of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is not entitled for the declaration that defendant Nos.2 and 3 have no valid security interest/mortgage created in their favour with respect to the Mortgaged property described in Schedule-I of the Original Application.

¶42

The applicant Bank has also prayed for sale of the suit property and sale proceeds thereof be paid to the applicant Bank towards satisfaction of the applicant Bank’s claim. However, as the said property is also mortgaged by defendant No.1 with defendant Nos. 2 and 3, the prayer of the applicant Bank to sale the mortgaged property cannot be granted.

¶43

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶44

ORDER

¶45

(A) Original Application No.991/2022 is partly allowed with costs.

(OA No. 991/2022)

Page 5 of 6

Sanap

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.31,22,729/- (Rupees Thirty One Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Nine only) along with future interest @8.80% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 07.01.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶50

¶51

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

¶52

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 22.12.2023 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶53

(OA No. 991/2022)

¶54

Page 6 of 6

¶55

Sanap

Bank of India v. Rohit Chaskar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Rohit Chaskar

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

Yes Bank versus M/S. Akruti Bricks

Canara Bank versus Sheela

Yes Bank versus Akash Surude

Federal Bank versus Rajamram

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus Mr. Shrinivas Nagesh Alle Prop M/S Pranoti Packaging

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. v. N. Pethe Brothers