Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Chandrasen Kamable

DRT19 Mar 2024OA/681/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues from borrowers, totaling approximately Rs. 35.87 lakhs after penal interest deduction. The court ordered joint/separate payment of principal, adjusted interest, and future interest, secured by the mortgaged property with a direction to issue the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 35,87,903/- with future interest at 9% p.a. The mortgaged property is secured; Bank is directed to issue Recovery Certificate and sold the property to recover dues.

Idbi Bank versus Chandrasen Kamable — Insurance | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 10.03.2022 Registered on: 26.08.2022 Decided on: 19.03.2024 Duration: Y M D 2 0 9

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.681/2022

¶3

IDBI Bank Ltd.,

¶4

Having its Registered Office at IDBI Tower, World Trade Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-415 001 and one of its Branch at 1^st Floor, Royal Heritage Building, Opposite Basant Bahar Theatre, Assembly Road, Kolhapur.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Chandrasen Gajanan Kamble, A/p. Atit, District Satara

¶8

Mrs. Prartibha Chandrasen Kamble, A/p. Atit, … Defendants

¶9

District Satara

¶10

APPEARANCES

¶11

For the Applicant Mr. Subhash Pawar - Advocate For Defendants Ex parte TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.36,01,175/-

(OA No.681/2022)

Page 1 of 6

[ npb ]

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 19^th March, 2024)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present Application for recovery of Rs.36,01,175/- i.e. Rs.34,62,946/- towards Home Loan account and Rs.1,38,229/- towards Home Loan (Insurance Loan) together with future interest @8.35 % p.a. with monthly rests thereon from 31^st January, 2020 till repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

The defendant Nos.1 and 2 are the borrowers and mortgagors for the Home Loan granted to them by the applicant Bank.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that defendant Nos.1 and 2 approached it on 27^th October, 2017 for financial assistance for purchase of flat.

¶21

On 18^th November, 2017 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Home Loan of Rs.30,00,000/- with interest @8.35% p.a. repayable in 192 equated monthly installments of Rs.28,367/-.

¶22

The defendant Nos.1 an 2 signed and executed the loan transaction and security documents as mentioned in

(OA No.681/2022)

Page 2 of 6

[ npb ]

paragraph No.5.6 of the Original Application, including Equitable Mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds in respect of immovable property i.e. Flat No.405 more particularly mentioned in Schedule A of the Original Application.

¶27

The applicant Bank contended that on 30^th November, 2017 defendant Nos.1 and 2 again approached it for another Home Loan (Loan for Insurance Premium) of Rs.1,2,000/which was sanctioned on 28^th December, 2017 with interest @8.35% p.a. to be repaid in 180 monthly installments of Rs.1168/-. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 signed and executed the loan transaction and security documents as set out in paragraph No.5.14 of the Original Application.

¶28

The applicant Bank further contended that after availing Home Loan and Insurance Loan, the defendants failed to pay the dues in both the loan accounts. Therefore, the applicant Bank was constrained to classify the loan accounts of defendant Nos.1 and 2 as Non-Performing Asset on 08^th September, 2018 as per the Reserve Bank of India guidelines.

¶29

Thereafter, the applicant Bank through its Advocate

(OA No.681/2022)

Page 3 of 6

[ npb ]

issued Recall Notice dated 03^rd October, 2018 calling upon the defendants to pay the outstanding amount with interest.

¶34

Since defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding, this application is filed.

¶35

Defendants were duly served with the summons. Despite service of summons, defendants failed to appear. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 31^st January, 2024 passed below the application (Exhibit-1).

¶36

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Ganesh S. Pawar, Manager and Authorized Signatory, which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶37

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1 to AW-22) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶38

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

¶39

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the

(OA No.681/2022)

Page 4 of 6

[ npb ]

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

¶44

The applicant Bank has claimed Rs.11,782/- and Rs.1,490/in respect of Penal Interest which cannot be granted and the said amounts shall be deducted from the respective total claim amounts. Thus, the aggregate claim amount shall be reduced from Rs.36,01,175/- to Rs. 35,87,903/- .

¶45

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶46

ORDER

¶47

(A) Original Application No.681/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶48

(B) Defendant Nos.1 and 2 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank towards Home Loan and Insurance Loan the aggregate sum of Rs.35,87,903/- (Rupees Thirty-Five Lakhs EightySeven Thousand Nine Hundred and Three only) with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 10^th March,2022 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this

(OA No.681/2022)

Page 5 of 6

[ npb ]

operative order.

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of immovable property bearing Flat No.405 having area 109.00 Sq. Mtrs., situated on Third Floor of the Apartment building known as “Saijyot Apartment” which is constructed on R.S. No.55/1B out of which plot No.12 & 13 having total area 372.27 Sq. Mtrs. situated at Banwadi, Taluka Karad, District Satara, more particularly mentioned in Schedule of immovable property of the Original Application.

¶54

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

¶55

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶56

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

¶57

Sd/- (Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 19.03.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶58

(OA No.681/2022)

¶59

Page 6 of 6

¶60

[ npb ]

Idbi Bank v. Chandrasen Kamable

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Chandrasen Kamable

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 Sanjay Wagh

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Pranav Prasanna Bhave Prop. M/S. Pranav Offset

Hdfc Bank versus M/S. Mohit Trans Lifter Pvt. Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Ravindra

Yes Bank versus Gopichand D. Kate

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus Vaishali Dumbare