Allowed

Uco Bank v. Vijaykumar Dhawan

DRT20 Jun 2024OA/448/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's application for recovery of a term loan principal and adjusted future interest against two borrowers who failed to appear. The Court directed payment with secured mortgage rights over the mortgaged flat.

What did the court decide?

Decree for payment of Rs. 25,37,723/- plus future interest at 9% per annum and entitlement to sell mortgaged property.

Uco Bank versus Vijaykumar Dhawan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 20.07.2022 Registered on: 12.04.2023 Decided on: 20.06.2024 Duration: Y M D 1 11 0

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE. (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.448/2023.

¶3

UCO Bank,

¶4

A Corporate Body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at – 10, B.T.M. Sarani, Kolkata and branch amongst other places at Market Yard, Indapur Road, Baramati, Taluka Baramati, District Pune through its Branch Manager Shri. Manoj Ambadas Panpatil.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Vijaykumar Parvatrao Dhawan

¶8

Age: adult, Occ.-Service,

¶9

Mrs. Nita Vijaykumar Dhawan Age: adult, Occ.-Service, Both R/at- Flat No.6, Shriram Nagar, Bhigwan Road, Jalochi, Baramati, Taluka Baramati, District Pune-413 102.

¶10

… Defendants

¶11

APPEARANCES

¶12

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶13

Mr. R.B.Ganbote - Advocate Ex parte. TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.25,37,723/-.

¶14

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 20^th June, 2024)

(OA No.448/2023)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank filed present application for recovery of sum of Rs.25,37,723/- together with future interest thereon @10.15% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the application till repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶20

Defendant No.1 & 2 approached and requested the Applicant Bank on 17.01.2020 for a Term Loan of Rs.22,30,000/- for purchase of Residential Flat to them. The Applicant Bank favourably considered the request of defendant No.1 and 2 and sanctioned a Term Loan of Rs.22,30,000/- for purchase of Residential Flat, on 17.02.2020, on certain terms and conditions.

¶21

In order to secure the said Term Loan facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan transaction and security documents, in favour of the Applicant Bank. Further, defendants executed mortgage to secure Term Loan on 26.02.2020 and mortgaged the below mentioned property in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶22

All that piece and parcel of Flat No.5 admeasuring 758.24 sq.ft. on the second floor of Á’Building known as “Shriram Complex”, constructed on land bearing Plot Nos.91 and 92 out of Gat No.132/2 at village Jalochi, Baramati,

(OA No.448/2023)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

Taluka Baramati, within the limits of Registration District, Pune, Sub Registration District Baramati, District Pune, as mentioned in Para No.5.7 of the Original Application.

¶27

It is contended that defendant No.1 & 2 have not paid the installments in the said Loan Account (No.12670610034422) on time and they have committed breach of the sanction terms and conditions and hence, the account of defendants with the Applicant Bank turned Non Performing Assets as per the Reserve Bank of India norms.

¶28

Thereafter, the applicant Bank on 14.07.2022 issued Recall Notice to the defendants calling upon them to pay the outstanding amounts. Despite service of Notice, defendants failed and neglected to comply with the demand in the said Notice.

¶29

Hence, this application is filed.

¶30

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 19.04.2024 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

¶31

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

(OA No.448/2023)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

The applicant Bank has produced in evidence the original loan documents at Sr.Nos.AW-1 to AW-9 which corroborate the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶36

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

¶37

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶38

Considering the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 9% per annum (simple) for all the facilities, it would be just and reasonable.

¶39

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(A) Original Application No.448/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶42

(B) Defendant No.1 & 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Bank towards Term Loan sum of Rs.25,37,723 /- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Three only) with future interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.28.07.2022 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.448/2023)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of the following immovable property -

¶47

(A) All that piece and parcel of Flat No.5

¶48

admeasuring 758.24 sq.ft. on the second floor of “A” Building known as “Shriram Complex”, constructed on land bearing Plot Nos.91 and 92 out of Gat No.132/2 at village Jalochi, Baramati, Taluka Baramati, within the limits of Registration District, Pune, Sub Registration District Baramati, District Pune, as mentioned in Para No.5.7 of the Original Application.

¶49

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

¶50

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

Place: Pune Date: 20.06.2024

¶53

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

¶54

(OA No.448/2023)

¶55

Page 5 of 5

¶56

[ANIL]

Uco Bank v. Vijaykumar Dhawan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Vijaykumar Dhawan

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Pushpawati Khaire

Hdfc Bank versus Dipak Arjun Veer

Federal Bank versus Prakash

State Bank of India versus Niranjan Desai

Union Bank of India versus Nazim Nakade

State Bank of India versus Sambhaji