Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi

DRT20 Mar 2025OA/113/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery of dues, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the claim by Bank of Baroda against respondents who failed to appear and contest. The Tribunal directed payment of the principal amount with future interest at 8% per annum and authorized the sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay Rs.31,70,063/- with future interest @8% p.a. (simple); authorized sale of mortgaged property; recovery certificate issued.

Bank of Baroda versus Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 30.05.2023 Registered on: 04.10.2023 Decided on: 20.03.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 09 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J.R. Chauhan Presiding officer)

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.31,70,063/-

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.113/2023

¶5

Bank of Broda, Bank of Baroda with effect from 1st April 2019 in terms Gazatte of India no. GSR No.2E dated 2^nd January 2019 issued by Ministry of Finance Govt. India. Body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having it is Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda Gujarat & having one of its Branch at Waluj, Dist. Aurangabad Through its authorized officer Lalit S/o Ninaji Nale, Age : 37 Years, Occ.: Service, as a Chief Manager, Waluj, Bank of Baroda at Aurangabad, R/o Aurangabad.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi, Age : Major years, Occ : Agril, R/o : Flat No. B-9, Sankalp Parki Nr, Nr Renuka Mata Kaman, Satara Parisar, Dist.Aurangabad.

¶9

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 1 of 9

¶10

AND

¶11

Flat no.9, Sankalpa Park, Gut no.106, Beed By Pass, Dist. Aurangabad.

¶12

Rupali Rakesh Gandhi, Age : Major years, Occ : Agril, R/o : Flat No. B-9, Sankalp Parki Nr, Nr Renuka Mata Kaman, Satara Parisar, Dist.Aurangabad. AND

¶13

Flat no.9, Sankalpa Park, Gut no.106, Beed By Pass, Dist. Aurangabad.

¶14

… Defendants

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

Mr. A.L. Muley - Advocate

¶17

For the Applicant For Defendant Nos.1 and 2 Ex-parte

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

(Delivered on 20^th March, 2025)

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.31,70,063/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lacs Seventy Thousand and Sixty-Three only) as on 29.04.2023 together with further interest at the contractual rate till the full and final payment and / or realization of the entire amount due and cost from the defendants jointly and severally.

¶21

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 2 of 9

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶23

The defendant No.1 is a businessman and was in need of financial assistance for Fund Based and Non Fund Based Limit Facility and has approached the applicant bank for Housing Loan with Loan Application dated 31.08.2018.

¶24

The applicant bank further submitted that considering the request of the defendant Nos.1 and 2, the applicant bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 05.1.2018 and 01.12.2018 sanctioned the Housing Loan facility of Rs.11,88,276/(Rupees Eleven Lacs Eighty-Eight Thousand Two Hundred Seventy-Six only) and Top Up of Rs.13,22,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lacs Twenty-Two Thousand only) to the defendant Nos.1 and 2.

¶25

In order to secure the aforesaid Housing Loan facility, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 signed, executed and delivered the Loan Agreement for Individuals Housing Loan and Declaration Cum Undertaking cum Authority, in favour of the applicant bank on 01.12.2018. The defendant No.1 executed Declaration in respect of Mortgage by deposit of title deeds in respect of immovable property on 18.01.2019, Undertaking for Creation of Extension of Mortgage dated

¶26

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 3 of 9

¶27

01.12.2018, Memorandum of Entry dated 18.01.2019, Notice of Intimation of Mortgage by way of Deposit of Title Deed vide No.ARB2-746/2019 dated 04.02.2019, Attestation Memo with Letter of Installment with acceleration Clause dated 01.12.2018 in favour of the applicant bank mentioned in Paragraph No. III of the O.A.

¶28

In order to secure the Housing Loan facility of Rs.11,88,276/- and Top Up Loan of Rs.13,22,000/-, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 executed Declaration of Mortgage by deposit of Title Deeds of their immovable property, mentioned at Scheduled –A of the Original Application, which is as under :

¶29

A] Flat No. B-9, admeasuring area 54.97 sq. mtrs. Built up area, second floor, Sankalpa Park, situated at Gut No.106, Satara Beed By Pass Aurangabad in the name of Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi which is bounded as under:

¶30

East	West	South	North
Staircase and Lobbey	Open to Sky	Open to Sky	Open to Sky

¶31

The applicant bank further contended that the defendants did not adhere to the terms and conditions of the security documents, sanction and defaulted in maintaining the loan

¶32

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 4 of 9

¶33

accounts regularly. The defendants have failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed installments due. The defendants have failed and neglected to repay the full debts with all interest, costs, charges and expenses.

¶34

It is further contended by the applicant bank that the loan account of the defendants became sticky and stagnant. The defendants failed and neglected to pay the amounts due and as such the accounts of the defendants were continuously irregular and bad and hence classified as NonPerforming Asset on 13.06.2020. Therefore, the applicant bank constrained to recall the loan facility. Therefore, the applicant bank has issued Demand and Loan Recall Notice on 30.04.2023 calling upon the defendants to pay the entire dues of the applicant bank amounting to Rs.31,70,063/together with interest thereon @8.55% p.a. for Bank of Baroda for Fund Based ad Non Based limit facility with yearly rests from the date of filing of the Original Application till payment and / or realization thereof in respect of the accounts, mentioned in Paragraph No. IX of the Original Application.

¶35

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 5 of 9

¶36

The particulars of the Housing Loan facility and Top Up Loan facility to the defendants is as under:

¶37

Housing Loan Account No.41280600000409 AND Top Up Loan No.41280600000409 :

¶38

a)	Principal loan amount	Rs.11,88,276.00 Rs.13,22,000.00
b)	Total outstanding amount due as on 29.04.2023 with uncharged interest	Rs.31,70,063.00
c)	Total outstanding due as on 29.04.2023 with further interest thereon from 30.04.2023	Rs.31,70,063.00/-

¶39

The applicant bank submitted that it has maintained the extract of loan accounts of the defendants in its ordinary course of business which was duly certified by the Branch Head in the capacity of the Manager and system in-charge of computer system as per Section 2A of Banker’s Book Evidence Act. The applicant bank further stated that the cause of action arose on 28.01.2023 when the notice was issued to defendants. Hence, this Original Application filed by the applicant bank to recover the dues from the defendant Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally.

¶40

In this matter the defendant Nos.1 and 2 failed to appear despite service of summons by way of paper publication

¶41

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 6 of 9

¶42

(Exchibit-13 to 15). Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 15^th March, 2024.

¶43

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Evidence (Exhibit-04) of Mr. Laliut Ninaji Nale, Chief Manager of Bank of Baroda i.e. the applicant bank and has produced on record the original loan documents at Sr. Nos. AA, A1 to A14 alongwith List (Exhibit-05), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest at the rate 8.55% per annum with yearly rests from the date of filing of the original application till the full realization of the entire amount due and cost from the defendants. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @8% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶47

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 7 of 9

¶48

15. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(A) Original Application No.113/2023 is allowed with cost.

¶51

(B) Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are hereby ordered and directed jointly and severally to pay to the applicant the aggregate sum of Rs.31,70,063/(Rupees Thirty-One Lacs Seventy Thousand and Sixty-Three only) along with future interest @8% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the original application i.e. 30^th May, 2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶52

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the Declaration of Mortgage by deposit of Title Deeds of immovable property, mentioned at Scheduled –A of the Original Application, which is as under :

¶53

A] Flat No. B-9, admeasuring area 54.97 sq. mtrs. Built up area, second floor, Sankalpa Park, situated at Gut No.106, Satara, Beed By Pass, Aurangabad in the name of Rakesh Rajendra

¶54

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 8 of 9

¶55

Gandhi which is bounded as under:

¶56

East	West		South		North
Staircase and Lobbey	Open	to	Open	to	Open	to
	Sky		Sky		Sky

¶57

as is disclosed in Paragraph No.3-A of the Original Application.

¶58

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the above said Mortgaged Property as is disclosed in Paragraph No. 3-A of the Original Application to recover its dues.

¶59

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶60

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

¶61

Pronounced in open Court. Sd/Date : 20.03.2025. (Dr. J.R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶62

[SBJ] (OA No.113/2023) Page 9 of 9

Bank of Baroda v. Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Rakesh Rajendra Gandhi

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

Ms Ramchandra Shivdas Agrawal versus The Malkapur Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Anand Prabhakar Khobragade

State Bank of India versus Abhay Chandrakant Kulkarni

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sukhdev Laxman Waghchore

Punjab National Bank versus New Pallavi Sahakari Thibak Sinchan Yojana Limited

Sai Agro Industries versus Union Bank of India