Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav

DRT14 Feb 2024OA/175/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of a housing loan default. The court modified the claimed penal interest and future interest rates. Relief was granted jointly against the borrower and guarantor secured by a mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs.22,30,603 plus future interest at 9% p.a. from 22.10.2021, entitlement to sell mortgaged property, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 22.10.2021 Registered on: 16.03.2022 Decided on: 14.02.2024 Duration: Y M D 2 3 23

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.175/2022

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra, A Banking Company incorporated under The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its Head Office at: Lokmangal, 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune-411 005 and Branch amongst other places at Ratnagiri City Branch, Ratnagiri.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mrs. Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav, Age-Adult, Occupation-Business,

¶7

Mr. Ravikiran Shrikant Jadhav, Age-Adult, Occupation-Business, Both R/at:

¶8

(a) 982, “Shripushpa” Vikaswadi, At Post Kherdi, Taluka Chiplun, District – Ratnagiri– 415 604.

¶9

(b) Flat No.3, Ground Floor, Indira Apartment, Plot No.2, S.No.71, At Post Nachane, Taluka & District Ratnagiri-415 639.

… Defendants

(OA No.175/2022)

Page 1 of 6

[ npb ]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant	Mr. Vallabh S Tokekar - Advocate
For Defendants	Exparte

¶16

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.22,49,596.73Ps.

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

(Delivered on 14^th February, 2024)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present Application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.22,46,596.73Ps. (wrongly claimed instead of Rs.22,49,596.73Ps.) together with future interest @10.25% p.a. with quarterly rests thereon from 22^nd October, 2021 till full repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendant Nos.1 and 2.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

The defendant No.1 being principal borrower was in need of finance for purchase of house property and hence approached the applicant Bank on 10^th March, 2013.

¶22

On 21^st March, 2013 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed Housing Loan of Rs.17,85,000/- with interest @10.25% p.a. with monthly rests repayable with EMI of Rs.17,525/- commencing from April, 2013.

¶23

The defendant No.2 stood as guarantor for the said Housing Loan. Defendants signed and executed loan

(OA No.175/2022)

Page 2 of 6

[ npb ]

transaction and security documents including Equitable Mortgage Deed dated 20^th March, 2013 by deposit of title deeds in respect of Flat No.3 more particularly mentioned in Schedule of the mortgage property in Original Application.

¶28

The applicant Bank contended that after availing the Housing Loan, defendant No.1 was not regular in repayment under the Housing Loan account. Therefore, the Housing Loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset on 30^th July, 2016.

¶29

The applicant Bank further contended that defendants executed the Balance and Security Confirmation Letters on 20^th March, 2016 and 14^th March, 2019 acknowledging balance outstanding at the foot of the Housing Loan account.

¶30

Since defendants did not repay the outstanding amount together with interest, the applicant Bank issued Demand Notice dated 02^nd August, 2021 calling upon them to make payment as set out therein. Despite receipt of Demand Notice, defendants failed to comply with the demand in the said Notice.

(OA No.175/2022)

Page 3 of 6

[ npb ]

Hence, this application is filed.

¶35

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide order dated 16^th January, 2024 below the application (Exhibit-01).

¶36

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Anand Dingankar, Chief Manager which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶37

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/15) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶38

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

¶39

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.

¶40

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of

(OA No.175/2022)

Page 4 of 6

[ npb ]

Rs.18,994/- which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.22,49,596.73Ps. is reduced to Rs.22,30,602.73Ps. (rounded off to Rs.22,30,603/-).

¶45

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10.25% p.a. with quarterly rests. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶46

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(A) Original Application No.175/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶49

(B) Defendant Nos.1 and 2 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.22,30,603/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Thirty Thousand Six Hundred and Three only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 22^nd October, 2021 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this

(OA No.175/2022)

Page 5 of 6

[ npb ]

operative order.

Flat No.3, on the Ground Floor, in the building known as “Indira Apartment” bearing Municipal House No.707Q/A/3, area admeasuring 505 sq. fts. lying, being and situated on the land bearing Municipal Ward No.4/20, Plot No.2, S.No.71, H.No.1/1/+2+14+15/2+16/2+17/1B1, bearing CTS No.580A (part) area admeasuring 0-02-90 Hector, lying being and situated at Village Nachane, Taluka Ratnagiri, District Ratnagiri and within the limits of Ratnagiri Municipal Corporation,

¶56

more particularly mentioned in Schedule of Simple Mortgage Deed dated 4^th May, 2007.

¶57

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

¶58

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶59

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

¶60

Place : Pune Date : 14.02.2024

¶61

Sd/- (Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶62

(OA No.175/2022)

¶63

Page 6 of 6

¶64

[ npb ]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Vibhavari Ravikiran Jadhav

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Maruti Atole

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ravindra Jagtap

Federal Bank versus Sadashiv Patil

Bank of Maharashtra versus Praveenkumar Menon

Canara Bank versus Gayatri Engineering Solutions Prop Shri. Milind N. Joshi

Canara Bank versus Shri Datta Fabricators