Allowed

Federal Bank v. Sangita Hakke

DRT2 Apr 2024OA/1078/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues after defendants appeared ex parte. The court reduced the claim by penal interest and approved future interest at 9% per annum, granting the right to sell mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 59,44,686 plus future interest at 9% p.a. from 30.05.2022; recovery certificate issued; right to sell mortgaged land granted.

Federal Bank versus Sangita Hakke — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 30.05.2022 Registered on : 08.12.2022 Decided on : 02.04.2024 Duration : Y M D 01 10 03

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1078/2022.

¶3

The Federal Bank Limited, A Banking Company within the meaning of Companies Act, 2013 (18/2013) having its registered office at Federal Towers, Alwaye, Kerala and branch at – S.T. Colony, Keshar Bhavan, 100 feet Road, Near Ganesh Mandir, Vishrambag, Sangi - 416415.

¶4

.. Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 Mrs. Sangita Dashrath Hakke, Age 44 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Kavalapur, Hakke Mala, Tasgaon Road, Tal. Miraj, District Sangli 416306.

¶7

2 Mr. Dashrath Raghunath Hakke, Age 54 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Kavalapur, Hakke Mala, Tasgaon Road, Tal. Miraj, District Sangli 416306.

(OA No. 1078/2022)

Page 1 of 6

Sanap

3 Mr. Raghunath Ganpati Hakke, Age 77 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Kavalapur, Lukai Mala, Tasgaon Road, Tal. Miraj, District Sangli 416306.

¶12

4 Mrs. Indubai Raghunath Hakke, Age 66 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Kavalapur, Lukai Mala, Tasgaon Road, Tal. Miraj, District Sangli 416306.

¶13

5 Mr. Pradeep Shivaji Gavade, Age 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : 805, Ghajage Bhuite Gavade Galli, Kamathe, Taluka Tasgaon, District Sangli 416306.

¶14

.. Defendants

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

For Applicant Advocate Nikhil Barsode. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶17

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.62,51,449/-

¶18

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 02^nd April, 2024)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.62,51,449/- together with future interest @11.75% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

Defendant No.1 is borrower and defendant Nos.2 to 5 are co-

(OA No. 1078/2022)

Page 2 of 6

Sanap

borrowers/co-obligants. Defendants Nos.1 and 2 are also mortgagors. As per the loan application of the defendants, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the following loan facilities to the defendants.

¶26

Name of the facility	Amount	Date of sanction
AMTL – 1	23,00,000/-	30.03.2017
AMTL – 2	10,00,000/-	30.03.2017
AMTL – 3	7,00,000/-	30.03.2017

¶27

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of mortgage of land Gat Nos. 862, 859, 793, 792/A and 792/B situated at village Kavalapur, District Sangli on 29.03.2017, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶28

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 09.09.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶29

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No. 1078/2022)

Page 3 of 6

Sanap

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 22.01.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶34

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Gangadhar Raghunath Joshi, Manager and power of attorney holder of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW-1-19 along with list (Exhibit 9), 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. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶37

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.

¶38

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.1,77,146=05 for AMTL-1, of Rs.75,309=53 for AMTL-2 and of Rs.54,308=91

(OA No. 1078/2022)

Page 4 of 6

Sanap

for AMTL-3 i.e. total of Rs.3,06,763/- which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.62,51,449/- is reduced to Rs.59,44,686/-.

¶43

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.75% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶44

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(A) Original Application No. 1078/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶47

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 5 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.59,44,686/(Rupees Fifty Nine Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Six Hundred Eighty Six only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 30.05.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No. 1078/2022)

Page 5 of 6

Sanap

valid and subsisting mortgage of the immovable i.e. land Gat Nos. 862, 859, 793, 792/A and 792/B situated at village Kavalapur, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, more particularly described in the Schedule-I of the Original Application.

¶53

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

¶54

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶55

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

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

Place : Pune Date : 02.04.2024

¶58

(Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶59

(OA No. 1078/2022)

¶60

Page 6 of 6

¶61

Sanap

Federal Bank v. Sangita Hakke

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Sangita Hakke

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 Shashikant Barge

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sunanda Meshram

Yes Bank versus Kiran Maruti Ghule

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shashidhar Chavan

Bank of Baroda versus M/S. Quality Cement Veet Products and Suppliers Prop. Mr. Netaji Ramchandra Yadav

Union Bank of India versus Vijay Tendolkar