Allowed

Yes Bank v. Ashok Khandu Amale

DRT23 Jan 2024OA/249/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's ex-parte application for recovery of dues from borrowers who failed to honor a construction equipment loan. The court adjusted specific charges and capped future interest at 9% simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants directed to pay Rs.19,01,737/- with future interest @9% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Hypothecated property to be sold for recovery.

Yes Bank versus Ashok Khandu Amale — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 05.02.2022 Registered on : 29.03.2022 Decided on : 23.01.2024 Duration : Y M D 01 11 18

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 249/2022.

¶3

Yes Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company within the meaning of Section 5 C of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and constituted under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered Office at 9^th Floor, Discovery of India, Nehru Centre, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai 400018 and Branch Office at – Erandawana Branch, Pune 410004.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Ashok Khandu Amale,

¶8

2 Rohidas Khandu Amale, Both R/o : Amale Vasti, AP Kusgaon, Taluka Maval, Near Datta Mandir, Pune 410506.

¶9

.. Defendants

¶10

APPEARANCES

¶11

For Applicant	Advocate Pradip Yadav.
For Defendants	Exparte.

(OA No. 249/2022)

Page 1 of 5

Sanap

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.20,14,964/-

¶16

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 23^rd January, 2024)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.20,14,964/- together with future interest @10% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

Defendant No.1 is a borrower and defendant No.2 is coborrower. As per the loan application of defendants, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Construction Equipment Loan of Rs.22,04,206/- as per loan agreement dated 09.01.2020 with agreed rate of interest @10% per annum.

¶20

In order to secure the aforesaid Construction Equipment Loan, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of hypothecation of JCB 3DX bearing RTO Registration No. MH-14-JA-4471 in favour of the applicant Bank on 09.01.2020.

¶21

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 14.05.2021, the applicant Bank issued

(OA No. 249/2022)

Page 2 of 5

Sanap

legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶26

Hence, this application is filed.

¶27

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 21.12.2023 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶28

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Aadhish Shintre, Authorized Representative of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-6 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

The applicant Bank has claimed Late Payment Charges of Rs.27,662/-, Cheque Bounce Charges of Rs.6,195/- and Other

(OA No. 249/2022)

Page 3 of 5

Sanap

Charges of Rs.79,370/- total of Rs.1,13,227/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.20,14,964/- is reduced to Rs.19,01,737/-.

¶36

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10% 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.

¶37

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶38

ORDER

¶39

(A) Original Application No. 249/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶40

(B) The defendants shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.19,01,737/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs One Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Seven only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.02.20222 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No. 249/2022)

Page 4 of 5

Sanap

property i.e. JCB 3DX bearing RTO Registration No. MH-14-JA-4471, more particularly described in Para No.3-A of the Original Application.

¶46

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

¶47

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶48

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

¶49

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 23.01.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶50

(OA No. 249/2022)

¶51

Page 5 of 5

¶52

Sanap

Yes Bank v. Ashok Khandu Amale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank v. Ashok Khandu Amale

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

Oswal Shirish Dalichand HUF Through Its Karta Shirish Oswal versus Indian Bank

Uco Bank versus Aparna Pushpak Karule

Punjab National Bank versus Lilabai Kharat

Bank of Maharashtra versus Makrand

Uco Bank versus Dasa Shiva Narute

Punjab National Bank versus Anil Atmaram Haware