Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Raj Distributor

DRT26 Nov 2025OA/122/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a debt recovery matter, the Bank of Maharashtra filed an original application to recover a loan of Rs. 86,36,390/- along with interest. The respondents failed to appear. The Tribunal allowed the application, directed recovery of the principal amount with future interest at 9% per annum, and confirmed the security by way of mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Direct recovery of Rs. 86,36,390/- with future interest at 9% p.a. (simple) from 12.11.2024, secured by mortgaged property.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Raj Distributor — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 12.11.2024 Registered on: 19.02.2025 Decided on: 26.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 00 14

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Shri Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 122/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 86,36,390/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition of Undertakings) Act V of 1970, carrying on banking business and Having its Head Office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 005 and Zonal Office at Pushpak Plaza, Ganesh Nagar, Ausa Road, Latur, District Latur413531. Branch at Vivekanand Chowk, Eagle Building, Shahu Chowk, Latur-413512. Through its Authorized officer, Shri. Sudarshan Bhaktaraj Khadke, Age: Major, Occ.: Service, Working as Senior Manager, Vivekanand Chowk Branch, Near Rahharshi Shahu Chowk, Eagle Building, Latur 413512.

… Applicant

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 1 of 9

[AMBADAS]

Versus

1. M/s. Raj Distributor, Through its Prop. Nikhil Bhagwat Badame, Age: Major, Occ.: Business, Address: Plot No. E-18, Old MIDC, Barshi Road, Latur-413512. AND Address: Bungalow No. 13, Sai Vihar Society, New Khadgaon Road, Latur. AND

¶12

Address: Ramchandra Niwas, Behind Gangavihar, Shyam Nagar, Latur-413512.

¶13

2. Snehal Nikhil Badame, Age: Major, Occ.: Business, Address: Plot No. E-18, Old MIDC, Barshi Road, Latur-413512. AND

¶14

Address: Bungalow No. 13, Sai Vihar Society, New Khadgaon Road, Latur. AND

¶15

Address: Ramchandra Niwas, Behind Gangavihar, Shyam Nagar, Latur-413512.

¶16

…Defendants

¶17

APPEARANCES

¶18

For the Applicant Mr. Atul A. Mishra - Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 2 of 9

[AMBADAS]

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 26.11.2025)

¶24

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶25

recovery of a sum of Rs. 86,36,390/- (Rupees Eighty Six Lacs, Thirty Six Thousand, Three Hundred and Ninety only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 12.11.2024, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶26

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶27

The Applicant Bank alleged that Defendant No. 1 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank to the sanction Working Capital (Cash Credit Facility). Upon due consideration of the said request and the financial requirements of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Working Capital (Cash Credit Facility) of Rs. 85,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 14.02.2022, subject to certain terms and conditions as mutually agreed upon. The

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 3 of 9

[AMBADAS]

agreed rate of interest was @8.55% per annum with monthly rests.

¶32

¶33

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, request letter, demand promissory note and registered mortgage bearing daybook no. 1773/2022 dated 17.02.2022 etc. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee dated 18.02.2022 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶34

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan Facility sanctioned, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered mortgage bearing daybook no. 1773/2022 dated 17.02.2022. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property:

¶35

All that piece and parcel of plot no. 1 to 20, out of Gut No. 6, admeasuring 6158.25 Sq. Mtrs., Village Khadgaon, Pakharsangavi Road, Near Khadgaon & Pakharsangavi Village, south of Latur, Barshi Road, Latur 413512, which is bounded as under:

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 4 of 9

[AMBADAS]

North: Land of Shashikant Salunke, East: Land of Gangar Anmol Collection, West: Land of Birajdar, South: Land of Chandrakant Salunke.

¶40

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed rate of interest as per terms and conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter, the applicant bank repeatedly made demand of loan amount and called upon the defendants to pay with the agreed rate of interest thereon, but the defendants failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendant became irregular and classified as NPA on 31.07.2024. Therefore on 06.08.2024 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 5 of 9

[AMBADAS]

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 05.08.2025.

¶45

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Shri. Sudarshan Bhaktaraj Khdke, Senior Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. AW-1(1) to AW-1(10) along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶46

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

¶47

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

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 6 of 9

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable property of the borrowers which is mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶52

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12% per annum from the date of filing i.e. 12.11.2024 of this application till realization of the claim amount. 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.

¶53

ORDER

¶54

(A) Original Application No. 122/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶55

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 86,36,390/- (Rupees Eighty Six Lacs, Thirty Six Thousand, Three Hundred and Ninety only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 7 of 9

[AMBADAS]

Application i.e. 12.11.2024 till full payment / realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶60

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgaged of the following immovable properties vide registered mortgage bearing daybook no. 1773/2022 dated 17.02.2022 at Exh. AW-1(8) in list of documents

¶61

Exh. 5.

¶62

¶63

North: Land of Shashikant Salunke, East: Land of Gangar Anmol Collection, West: Land of Birajdar, South: Land of Chandrakant Salunke.

¶64

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

(OA No.122/2025)

Page 8 of 9

[AMBADAS]

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶69

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

¶70

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶71

Sd/-

¶72

Pronounced in open court. Place : Aurangabad Date : . 26.11.2025

¶73

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶74

(OA No.122/2025)

¶75

Page 9 of 9

¶76

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Raj Distributor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Raj Distributor

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Ganesh S/o Dhondiram Maujal

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Bramhi Print and Pack

Union Bank of India versus M/S Vatsala Electricals

Union Bank of India versus M/S Adityashree Construction

Bank of Maharashtra versus Yogesh Vishwasrao Pophale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Jijabrao Baburao Patil