Allowed

Bank of India v. Gaurav

DRT20 Mar 2025OA/1197/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's Original Application for recovery of dues of approximately Rs. 52.80 Lakhs from three defendants, who failed to appear. The court adjusted the claim amount based on account extracts and reduced future interest to 9% per annum, securing the recovery through existing hypothecation and mortgage. Relief granted includes recovery certificate and a

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 52,80,074/- plus future interest at 9% per annum; authorization to sell hypothecated/mortgaged properties; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of India versus Gaurav — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 20.12.2018 Registered on .. 27.12.2022 Decided on .. 20.03.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 06—03--00

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1197/2022.

¶3

Bank of India, A Bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its head office at Star House, C-5, G Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 and branch at – Sawarkar Chowk, Netaji Subhash Road, Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 Mr. Gaurav Kamlakar Bhoi, Age – Adult, Occ. – Business, Add. : Flat No.206, Prathmesh Apartment, Opp. S.T. Stand, Taluka and District Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶7

2 Mr. Kamalavati Kamlakar Bhoi, Age – Adult, Occ. – Business, Add. : Flat No.206, Prathmesh Apartment, Opp. S.T. Stand, Taluka and District Ratnagiri 415 612.

¶8

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 1 of 6

¶9

3 Mr. Nandkishor Sharad Adav, Age – Adult, Occ. – Business, Add. : At Sandkhol, Post Jaigad, Taluka and District Ratnagiri 415 612. … Defendants

¶10

:- Appearances

¶11

For Applicant Advocate Satyan Jagtap For Defendants Ex parte.

¶12

Total Claim Amount – Rs. 52,83,574/-

¶13

JUDGEMNT (Delivered on 20^th March, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.52,83,574/- together with future interest @13.70% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application dated 23.07.2014 of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Vehicle loan facility of Rs.40,00,000/- for construction of fishing boat for fishing to the defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 23.07.2014. Defendant Nos.2 and 3 stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by defendant No.1.

¶17

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 2 of 6

¶18

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with deed of hypothecation of Mechanized fishing vessel 2015 make 690 Ashok Leyland Engine with 6 cylinders with 2000 liters diesel fuel capacity having Engine No. FXHM 579324 and deed of mortgage of Municipal House No. 2118/6, Flat No.2, Ground Floor, Prathmesh Apartment, Opp. ST Stand, Survey No. 327 A1A1A2, C.T. Survey No. 3253B, Mouje Zadgaon, Taluka and District Ratnagiri, in favour of the applicant Bank. Further, defendant No.1 has also executed Acknowledgment of Debts/Securities on 07.01.2016 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan account.

¶19

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 30.12.2014, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, on 05.10.2018, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of

¶20

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 3 of 6

¶21

Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as Order dated 14.02.2025 below per passed Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1-1 to AW-1-16 along with list (Exh. 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

However, according to the applicant Bank, balance outstanding as per the extract of account in Term Loan is Rs.34,13,388/-, but on going through the account extract produced by the applicant Bank itself shows

¶27

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 4 of 6

¶28

that the balance outstanding as per the extract of account in Term Loan is Rs.34,09,888/-. Hence, the applicant Bank is entitled to claim balance outstanding of Rs.34,09,888/- + unapplied and accrued interest of Rs.18,70,536/- minus Penal Interest of Rs.350/- = Rs.52,80,074/-. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.52,83,574/- is reduced to Rs.52,80,074/-.

¶29

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @13.70% per annum. 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.

¶30

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

A} Original Application No. 1197/2022 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶33

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.52,80,074/(Rupees Fifty Two Lakhs Eighty Thousand Seventy Four only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 20.12.2018 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this

¶34

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 5 of 6

¶35

operative order.

¶36

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting hypothecation of Mechanized fishing vessel 2015 make 690 Ashok Leyland Engine with 6 cylinders with 2000 liters diesel fuel capacity having Engine No. FXHM 579324 and mortgage of Municipal House No. 2118/6, Flat No.2, Ground Floor, Prathmesh Apartment, Opp. ST Stand, Survey No. 327 A1A1A2, C.T. Survey No. 3253B, Mouje Zadgaon, Taluka and District Ratnagiri, more particularly described in the Para Nos. 5.6 and 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶37

D} The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the hypothecated and mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶38

E} Issue Recovery Certificate. F} The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶39

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 20.03.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶40

Sanap ( OA No. 1197/2022 ) 6 of 6

Bank of India v. Gaurav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Gaurav

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

Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Wisdom Pharmaceticals

Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Nilesh

Uco Bank versus Ankit Phadtare

Federal Bank versus Ramesh Bapu Jadav(Deceased)

Federal Bank versus Sima Jarande

Federal Bank versus Vidyulata Mali