Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Shreekant

DRT12 Jul 2024OA/567/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte debt recovery application, the Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's claim for loan dues after finding no reason to disbelieve evidence due to the respondent's default. Future interest was reduced to 9% per annum, and a recovery certificate was issued against mortgaged land.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs. 20,54,062 with future interest @ 9% p.a.; permission to sell mortgaged property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Shreekant — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 05.09.2020 Registered on: 17.05.2022 Decided on: 12.07.2024 Duration: Y M D 03 10 07

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.567/2022.

¶3

Union Bank of India ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitions & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1980 having its Head Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 and having one of its branches at Punyashlok Bapusaheb Majaraj Building, Near Kudal High School, Taluka Kudal, District Sindhudurg – 416 520.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Shreekant Kashinath Redkar Age - adult, Occ.-Agriculturist, R/at548, Swapnapurti, Palkarwadi, Vetore, Taluka – Vengurla, District Sindhudurg- 416 516. …Defendant

¶8

APPEARANCES

¶9

For the Applicant Advocate R. B. Ganbote For the Defendants Ex parte

¶10

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.20,54,062/-.

(OA No.567/2022)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 12^th July, 2024)

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.20,54,062/- together with future interest @14.1% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the suit till repayment/realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶17

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant approached to the Applicant Bank for Term Loan of Rs.15,00,000/- for construction of Polyhouse. The Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 02.08.2016 granted the Term Loan facility to the defendant.

¶18

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facility, the defendant has executed loan and security documents as set out in Para Nos.5.5 of the Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank.

¶19

In addition to this, defendant has executed E-Karar (Declarative Mortgage) dated 29.07.2016 of the immovable property of the land i.e. all that piece and parcel of land bearing Gat No.1023 admeasuring 02 Hector 80 Are assessed at Rs.0.96 Ps at village Palkarwadi, Taluka –

(OA No.567/2022)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

Vengurla, within the limits of Registration District Sindhudurg, Sub Registration District Vengurla, District Sindhudurg, in favour of the Applicant Bank, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.7 of the Main Application.

¶24

The Applicant Bank contended that defendant has executed Letters of Confirmation in favour of the Applicant Bank on 25.07.2019 and 28.11.2019 and confirmed the balance in his Term Loan Account with the Applicant Bank.

¶25

The Applicant Bank contended that defendant has committed defaults in payment of installments in accounts as per the terms of sanction. Hence, the account of Defendant with the Applicant Bank has become NonPerforming Asset in accordance with the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, the Aplicant Bank through Advocate Premanand R. Narvekar issued Recall Notice to the defendant. But even after issuance of Legal Notice, the defendant failed to repay and close the term loan account.

¶26

Hence, this application is filed.

¶27

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per order dated 17.04.2024 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

(OA No.567/2022)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Vikramsinh V. Rohile, Branch Manager and has produced on record the Original Loan Transaction documents at Exhibits AW-1 to AW-12, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶32

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

¶33

Since the defendant 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 the reliefs claimed.

¶34

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 reliefs in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶35

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @14.1% per annum with monthly rests for the said loan facility. 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.

¶36

Hence, I pass the following order:-

(OA No.567/2022)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No.567/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶42

(B) Defendant shall pay sum of Rs.20,54,062/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Fifty Four Thousand Sixty Two only) with future interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.09.2020 till payment / realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶43

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by creation of Mortgage regarding immovable property i.e.all that piece and parcel of land bearing Gat No.1023 admeasuring 02 Hector 80 Are assessed at Rs.0.96 Ps at village Palkarwadi, Taluka – Vengurla, within the limits of Registration District Sindhudurg, Sub Registration District Vengurla, District Sindhudurg, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.7 of the Main Application.

¶44

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

¶45

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶46

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

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer, Date: 12.07.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

(OA No.567/2022)

Page 5 of 5

[ANIL]

[ANIL] (OA No.567/2022) Page 6 of 5

Union Bank of India v. Shreekant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Shreekant

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 India versus Bharat Bamdale

Bank of India versus Rajaram Bharade

Icici Bank Limited versus Ghanshyam

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sai Vibhuti Food and Beverages

Federal Bank versus Udaysingh Bhujangrao Phadnaik

Union Bank of India versus Savita Swami