Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sachin Bhosale

DRT13 Feb 2025OA/111/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of dues. The court sanctioned future interest at 9% simple interest, confirmed the mortgage charge, and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank was directed to recover sums from defendants with future interest at 9% per annum simpliciter; future interest claimed at penal rates was disallowed and reduced.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sachin Bhosale — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on : 04.07.2021 Registered on : 12.01.2022 Decided on : 13.02.2025 Duration : Y M D 03 07 09

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 111/2022.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra,

¶4

A Body Corporate established under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its registered office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411005 and one of its branch office at Market Yard, Supa, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Shri Sachin Yuvraj Bhosale, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – 108, Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶8

2 Shri Sambhaji Yuvraj Bhosale, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – 108, Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 1 of 8

Sanap

3 Shri Santosh Yuvraj Bhosale, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – 108, Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶13

4 Shri Rahul Narayan Pawar, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶14

5 Shri Jitendra Ramdas Kakade, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶15

6 Shri Nitin Suresh Pansare, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – At and Post Pansarewadi, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 412 204.

¶16

7 Shri Shekhar Anil Shitole, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/at – Supa Gaothan, Taluka Baramati, .. Defendants

¶17

District Pune 412 204.

¶18

APPEARANCES

¶19

For Applicant	Advocate R.B. Ganbote.
For Defendants	Exparte.
	Total Claim Amount – Rs.27,98,708/-

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

(Delivered on 13^th February, 2025)

¶22

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 2 of 8

Sanap

recovery of the sum of Rs.27,98,708/- together with future interest @9% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶27

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶28

As per the loan applications of defendant Nos.1 to 3, the applicant Bank sanctioned the following loan facilities to defendant Nos.1 to 3.

¶29

	Name of the facility	Amount Rs.	Date of Sanction
A	Term Loan	2,00,000/-	25.09.2012
B	Term Loan	3,00,000/-	20.06.2013

¶30

Defendant Nos. 4 and 5 stood guarantors for the repayment of Term Loan A and B availed by defendant Nos.1 to 3.

¶31

Further, as per the loan applications of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned the following loan facilities to defendant No.1.

¶32

	Name of the facility	Amount Rs.	Date of Sanction
C	Term Loan	5,00,000/-	23.09.2014
D	Term Loan	4,60,000/-	06.12.2014
E	Term Loan	3,00,000/-	02.07.2015
F	Term Loan	4,90,000/-	19.10.2016

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 3 of 8

Sanap

Defendant No. 4 stood guarantor for the repayment of Term Loan C, D and E, defendant No. 5 stood guarantor for the repayment of Term Loan C and defendant Nos.6 and 7 stood guarantors for the repayment of Term Loan F availed by defendant No.1.

¶37

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of mortgage of Gat No. 290+291 (P) admeasuring 65.5 R at village Pansarewadi, Taluka Baramati, District Pune and Gat No. 446(P) admeasuring 20 R at village Supra, Taluka Baramati, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶38

Further, the defendants have also executed Balance and Security Confirmation letters from time to time in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶39

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Despite personal visits of the Branch Manager to the defendants, the defendants failed

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 4 of 8

Sanap

and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶44

Hence, this application is filed.

¶45

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 04.02.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶46

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Manoj Dinkar Bhongale, Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-55 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶47

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

¶48

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.

¶49

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

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 5 of 8

Sanap

terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶54

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.5,209/- for Term Loan A; Rs.14,793/- for Term Loan B; Rs.16,686/-; for Term Loan C; Rs.5,852/- for Term Loan D and Rs.16,981/- for Term Loan F, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amounts of Term Loan A, B, C, D and F respectively are reduced to Rs.1,79,109/-, Rs.4,94,814/-, Rs.5,35,380/-, Rs.3,53,181/- and Rs.7,41,270/-.

¶55

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9% per annum. 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.

¶56

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶57

ORDER

¶58

(A) Original Application No. 111/2022 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶59

(B) Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.6,73,923/(Rs. Six Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Three only) towards Term Loan A

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 6 of 8

Sanap

and B along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.07.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶64

(C) Defendant Nos. 1 and 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.13,23,994/- (Rs. Thirteen Lakhs Twenty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Four only) towards Term Loan C, D and E along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.07.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶65

(D) Defendant Nos. 1, 6 and 7 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.7,41,270/- (Rs. Seven Lakhs Forty One Thousand Two Hundred Seventy only) towards Term Loan F along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.07.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No. 111/2022)

Page 7 of 8

Sanap

(E) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of Gat No. 290 + 291 (P) admeasuring 65.5 R at village Pansarewadi, Taluka Baramati, District Pune and Gat No. 446 (P) admeasuring 20 R at village Supra, Taluka Baramati, District Pune, more particularly described in the Para Nos. 5.7, 5.24, 5.38 and 5.46 of the Original Application.

¶70

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

¶71

(G) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶72

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

¶73

Place : Pune Date : 13.02.2025

¶74

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

¶75

(OA No. 111/2022)

¶76

Page 8 of 8

¶77

Sanap

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sachin Bhosale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sachin Bhosale

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

Punjab National Bank versus M//S. v T Enterprises Prop. Mr. Vikas Sharadchandra Agrawalrwal

Uco Bank versus Sadashiv Mantur

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ajinath Kedar

Punjab National Bank versus Ayaan Welness LLP

Canara Bank versus Mr. Neelesh Damodar Phuge

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Accutech Engineering Prop Mr. Divyesh Vilas Bauskar