Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Priyanka Agarwal

DRT2 Feb 2024OA/344/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of loan dues. The tribunal directed the defendant to pay the reduced claim amount along with future interest, confirming the bank's right to sell the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

The defendant directed to pay Rs.53,54,752/- with future interest; recovery of amount secured by sale of mortgaged flat; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Priyanka Agarwal — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 18.10.2021 Registered on : 12.04.2022 Decided on : 02.02.2024 Duration : Y M D 02 03 14

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 344/2022.

¶3

Union Bank of India, Erstwhile Andhra Bank, A Government of India undertaking under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980, having its head office at - 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 and Branch Office at 598, Sachapir Street, Cantonment, Pune 411001.

¶4

.. Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Miss Priyanka Sanjay Agarwal, R/o : 18, Ghorpadi Bazar, Near Bank of Maharashtra, Ambha Bhavan, Pune 411001.

¶7

.. Defendant

¶8

APPEARANCES

¶9

For Applicant Advocate M.V. Kini. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶10

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.53,68,202/-

(OA No. 344/2022)

Page 1 of 5

Sanap

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 02^nd February, 2024)

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.53,68,202/- together with future interest @7.3% per annum with monthly rests from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under : The defendant is the borrower and mortgagor for the Term Loan/Housing Loan facility. As per the loan applications of the defendant dated 21.01.2017 and 24.01.2017 respectively, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the following loan facilities.

¶17

Name of the facility	Amount	Date of sanction
Housing Loan	Rs.23,00,000/-	27.01.2017
Housing Loan	Rs.19,00,000/-	27.01.2017

¶18

In order to secure the aforesaid Housing Loans, the defendant executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with deed of hypothecation of movable property and mortgage deed of Flat No. 401, B Wing, Phase II, Aapla Ghar Sanaswadi, Gat No. 175, 176, 165,

(OA No. 344/2022)

Page 2 of 5

Sanap

181 and 183 situated at village Dingrajwadi, Taluka Shirur, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank. The agreed rate of interest was @8.75% per annum for the said loan facilities.

¶23

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 06.09.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶24

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 11.01.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶25

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Tella Subrahnanyam, Authorized Signatory of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-26 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶26

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

¶27

Since the defendant failed to appear and contest the

(OA No. 344/2022)

Page 3 of 5

Sanap

application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶32

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.

¶33

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.13,450/(Rs.8435/- + Rs.5,015/-), which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.53,68,202/- is reduced to Rs.53,54,752/-.

¶34

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(A) Original Application No.344/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶37

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.53,54,752/- (Rupees Fifty Three Lakhs Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Two only) along with future interest @7.3% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.

(OA No. 344/2022)

Page 4 of 5

Sanap

18.10.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶42

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of the Flat No. 401, B Wing, Phase II, Aapla Ghar Sanaswadi, Gat No. 175, 176, 165, 181 and 183 situated at village Dingrajwadi, Taluka Shirur, District Pune, more particularly described in the Schedule B of the Original Application.

¶43

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

¶44

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶45

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

¶46

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 02.02.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶47

(OA No. 344/2022)

¶48

Page 5 of 5

¶49

Sanap

Union Bank of India v. Priyanka Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Priyanka Agarwal

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

Punjab National Bank versus Pradip Pandurang Shinde

State Bank of India versus Pramila Salunke

Union Bank of India versus Arti Agarwal

State Bank of India versus M/S. Krishna Textiles Prop. Mr. Milind Kumar Mali

Canara Bank versus Abhishek Thepade

Federal Bank versus Deepak