Allowed

Federal Bank v. Netaji Yadav

DRT15 Jan 2024OA/432/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant Bank's claim for recovery of dues against the respondents, who failed to appear. The Court adjusted the claim amount by deducting certain charges and reduced future interest to 9% per annum, while securing the balance via mortgage on agricultural lands.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay Rs. 31,73,698/- with future interest @9% per annum; granted right to sell mortgaged property; issued Recovery Certificate.

Federal Bank versus Netaji Yadav — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on : 13.04.2022 Registered on : 04.05.2022 Decided on : 15.01.2024 Duration : Y M D 01 09 02

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 432/2022.

¶3

The Federal Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company within the meaning of Companies Act, 2013 (18/2013) having its registered office at Federal Towers, Bank Junction, Alwaye, Ernakulum District, Kerala and branch at – Ganesh Apartment, Ground Floor, Shaniwar Peth, Karad 415110, District Satara.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Mr. Netaji Ramchandra Yadav, Age 47 years, Occ.: Agriculture & Business,

¶8

2 Mrs. Manisha Netaji Yadav, Age 40 years, Occ.: Agriculture & Business, Both R/o : Karad Vita Road, Kadepur, Taluka Kadegaon, District Sangli 415305.

¶9

.. Defendants

¶10

APPEARANCES

¶11

For Applicant	Advocate N.D. Barsode.
For Defendants	Exparte.

¶12

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.34,02,277/-

(OA No. 432/2022)

Page 1 of 5

Sanap

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 15^th January, 2024)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.34,02,277/- together with future interest @13.35% 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 Nos.1 and 2 are farmers. As per the loan application of defendants dated 17.05.2014, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Term Loan facility of Rs.50,00,000/- to the defendants vide Sanction Order dated 28.09.2017 with interest @12.05% per annum.

¶20

In order to secure the aforesaid Term Loan, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of mortgage of Agricultural Lands Gat Nos. 526, 528, 580, 581, 585, 588, 289/A and 35 situated at Kadepur, Taluka Kadegaon, District Sangli in favour of the applicant Bank. Thereafter, on 19.08.2020, the defendants have executed Balance Confirmation and thereby acknowledged the dues pending on 18.08.2020.

¶21

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed

(OA No. 432/2022)

Page 2 of 5

Sanap

defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 18.12.2018 and 02.03.2021, 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.

¶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 01.01.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶28

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Dipak Annaso Latthe, Authorized signatory under Power Of Attorney Holder of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-15 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.

(OA No. 432/2022)

Page 3 of 5

Sanap

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.

¶35

The applicant Bank has claimed other charges of Rs.22,512/and Penal Interest of Rs.2,06,067/- total of Rs.2,28,579/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.34,02,277/- is reduced to Rs.31,73,698/-.

¶36

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @13.35% 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.432/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶40

(B) Defendant Nos.1 and 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.31,73,698/(Rupees Thirty One Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Eight only) along with future

(OA No. 432/2022)

Page 4 of 5

Sanap

interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 13.04.2022 till full payment / realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶45

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of Agricultural Lands Gat Nos. 526, 528, 580, 581, 585, 588, 289/A and 35 situated at Kadegaon, Taluka Kadepur, District Sangli, more particularly described in the Schedule-I of the Original Application.

¶46

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged 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 : 15.01.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶50

(OA No. 432/2022)

¶51

Page 5 of 5

¶52

Sanap

Federal Bank v. Netaji Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Netaji Yadav

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

Idbi Bank versus Sandesh

Bank of Maharashtra versus Nagarbai

Icici Bank Limited versus Bnsonavane Infra Private Limted

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shri Deepak Dhondiram Shinde Prop of Quality Engineers

Punjab National Bank versus Yogesh Siddhappa Hattale

Idbi Bank versus Yogiraj Sukale