Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Maruti

DRT23 Apr 2024OA/60/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex parte recovery application, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a springing case filed by Union Bank of India against three defendants. The court directed repayment of the loan principal with future interest and authorized the bank to proceed against mortgaged or hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs. 27,13,842/- with interest and empowering the bank to proceed against mortgaged/hypothecated/ personal properties.

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

¶1

Presented on:	24/11/2022
Registered on:	26/04/2023
Decided on:	23/04/2024
Duration:	Y. M. D.
	1 – 10 - 19

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, at Aurangabad Original Application No. 60 of 2023

¶3

Claim : Recovery of Rs. 27,13,842/-

¶4

Union Bank of India,

¶5

a body corporate and constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act v, 1970, having its Head Office at 239, Backbay Reclamation Bombay 400021 and one of its Branch at Rashin Branch Taluka Karjat Dist. Ahmednagar and acting through its Authorized Officer and one of Branch Manager Mr Bapu Abasaheb Supekar, age 42 years occup. Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Rashin Branch Taluka Karjat Dist. Ahmednagar - 414403 and having authority to file the application which includes the authority to sign and verify the application [email protected]

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶8

Page 1 of 7

¶9

Versus

¶10

1 Mr Maruti Sopan Mohite, age 80 years occup. agriculture at village Baradgaon Dagdi Taluka Karjat Dist. Ahmednagar – 414403 Mobile No. 9604720712 PAN No. CBXPM2238Q Election Card ID No. MT/39/227/135451

¶11

2 Mr Chandrakant Maruti Mohite, age 51 years occup. agriculture village Baradgaon Dagdi Taluka Karjat Dist. Ahmednagar – 414403 Mobile No. 9860431756 PAN No. BLPPM4779M

¶12

3 Mr Pandurang Sopan Gawali, age 50 years occup. agriculture village Baradgaon Dagdi Taluka Karjat Dist. Ahmednagar – 414403 Mobile No. 9921465844 PAN No. AZJPG0663R

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

Appearance :

¶15

For Applicant-bank : Mr. V.B. Kulkarni, Adv. For Defendants Absent

¶16

Shri Vimal Gupta Presiding Officer

¶17

Pronounced on: 23^rd April 2024

¶18

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶19

Page 2 of 7

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The applicant-bank has filed the present Original Application against defendants No.1 to 3 for recovery of sum of Rs. 27,13,842/-(Rs. twenty seven lakhs thirteen thousand eight hundred forty two only) towards outstanding of loan amount availed by them, together with future contractual rate of interest from 11/11/2022 till repayment/ realization, and, in default, for sale of mortgaged and hypothecated properties, as described in the Original Application.

¶22

Facts of the case, in short, are that defendant No.1 as a borrower and defendants No. 2 & 3 as guarantors have obtained Crop Loan of Rs. 16.00 lakhs from the applicant bank on 29/03/2018, on execution of relevant documents to secure the loan amount including Form of Declaration for creation of charge on properties owned by them, as shown in para No. 5.3 of the Orig. Application and on acceptance of terms and conditions as to repayment alongwith interest @ 7% p.a. with half yearly rests. It

¶23

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶24

Page 3 of 7

¶25

is pleaded that however, the defendants could not follow the

¶26

repayment programme and failed to repay it as agreed and thereby

¶27

the loan account classified as NPA on 31/03/2022 and the

¶28

applicant therefore, issued legal demand notice on 18/11/2021, to which the defendants did not pay any response. Hence this Original Application, with prayer for the reliefs sought, as mentioned in para No.1 above.

¶29

Though defendants No. 1 to 3 duly served with summons of the Orig. Application, by hand, vide Court Commissioner report Exh. 9, they preferred to remain absent in the matter and therefore, the matter proceeded ex parte against them, vide order dated 16/02/2024.

¶30

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶31

The point that arises for consideration is, whether the applicant-bank is entitled for the claim made in the Orig. Application against the defendants, as prayed for ?

¶32

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶33

Page 4 of 7

¶34

The applicant bank filed evidence on affidavit of Mr B.A.

¶35

Supekar, Branch Manager (Exh.5) along with list of documents (Exh.6) annexing therewith 13 documents, which are marked as Exh.A.W.1 to A.W. 13 on behalf of applicant, which clinches the claim of the applicant-bank against all the defendants. Moreover, in view of the fact that the averments in the Original Application have gone unrebutted, the Tribunal is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for the prayers made therein. Perusal of the documents including entries of deposit of amounts by defendants in statement of account filed shows that the application is filed well within the prescribed period of limitation. Hence I hold that all the defendants are liable to pay to applicant bank the claim amount claimed in the Orig. Application with future reasonable interest considering meantime long period Covid-Pandeic-19 and costs.

¶36

In the result, the present Orig. Application is allowed with costs, as under:

(O.A. No. 60/2023)

( Madkar)

Page 5 of 7

(A) Defendants No. 1 to 3 are ordered to pay jointly or severally sum of Rs. 27,13,842/-(Rs. twenty seven lakhs thirteen thousand eight hundred forty two only) alongwith interest @ 6% p.a., Simple, from 11/11/2022 till repayment/ realization.

¶41

(B) Amount recovered, if any, by applicant-bank during pendency of the Orig. Appln. shall be reduced from such calculated amount before the Recovery Officer and demand notice shall be issued for balance amount.

¶42

(C) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged and hypothecated properties, as described in the Orig. Appln. towards realization of their dues;

¶43

(D) The applicant-bank is entitled to proceed against the person and properties of all the defendants towards realization of the debt due.

¶44

(E) The applicant bank is entitled to the costs of the O.A.

¶45

(F) The applicant shall file a cost memo within two weeks from the date of receipt of order.

¶46

(G) The applicant bank to file affidavit before the Recovery Officer about sale of property and appropriation of money in the loan account under the securitization, if any, before issuance of demand notice.

¶47

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶48

Page 6 of 7

¶49

(H) Copy of order be sent to the Recovery Officer.

¶50

(I) Communicate copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶51

Order be uploaded on the official website.

¶52

( Vimal Gupta ) PRESIDING OFFICER, Aurangabad, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, Date: 23/04/2024 Aurangabad

¶53

( Madkar) (O.A. No. 60/2023)

¶54

Page 7 of 7

Union Bank of India v. Maruti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Maruti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Sultan

State Bank of India versus Manal

Shri Sarjerao Rambhau Thorat versus State Bank of India

State Bank of India versus M/s Gajanan Agrotech and Company

State Bank of India versus Gangadhar S/o Laxman Kadam

State Bank of India versus Angel Glass Industries