Allowed

State Bank of India v. Somnath Khandekar

DRT9 Oct 2025OA/1257/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this ex-parte application for recovery, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the claim of the State Bank of India against a borrower who defaulted on a housing loan. The Tribunal decreed repayment of the principal sum with future interest at 9% p.a. and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate, with rights to sell the mortgaged property reserved.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.33,85,596/- with future interest at 9% p.a.; sale of mortgaged property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Somnath Khandekar — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 05.11.2022 Registered on .. 15.09.2023 Decided on .. 09.10.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 02--11--04

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1257/2023.

¶3

State Bank of India,

¶4

A Banking Company constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 and having its Corporate Office at State Bank Bhavan, Nariman Point, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai 400021 and its branch at - Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Second Floor, Wardhaman, Seven Loves Chowk, Plot No. 321/A/3, Mahatma Phule Peth, Pune 411042.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Somnath Khelba Khandekar, Age Adult, Occ. Service, R/at – Shivajinagar, Vairag, Taluka Barshi, District Solapur 413 402.

¶8

… Defendant

¶9

Appearances :-

¶10

For Applicant Advocate R.B. Ganbote. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶11

Sanap ( OA No. 1257/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶12

Total Claim Amount – Rs.33,85,596/-

¶13

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 09^th October, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.33,85,596/- together with future interest @9.70% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

The defendant approached the applicant Bank through Wakdewadi RACPC Branch, Pune on 12.06.2018 and requested for a Housing loan of Rs.30,00,000/-. Accordingly, the applicant Bank considered the request and sanctioned the Housing loan facility of Rs.30,00,000/- to the defendant vide Arrangement Letter dated 14.07.2018.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendant has also mortgaged the property i.e. all that piece and parcel of Flat No. A-409, admeasuring 35.91 square meters plus enclosed balcony 4.53 square meters plus attached terrace 4.72 square meters plus utility terrace 2.16 square meters on fourth floor of A building,

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 1257/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶19

Legacy Aura constructed on S. No. 48/4 to 10 at village Rahatani, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as NonPerforming Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 10.10.2022, the applicant Bank issued Recall Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶21

Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 01.07.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Abhay D. Somkuwar, Chief 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-9 along with list

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 1257/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶25

(Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶26

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

¶27

Since the defendant 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.

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9.70% 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.

¶29

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A} Original Application No. 1257/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶32

B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.33,85,596/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Six only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.11.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this

¶33

Sanap ( OA No. 1257/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶34

operative order.

¶35

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of Flat No. A-409, admeasuring 35.91 square meters plus enclosed balcony 4.53 square meters plus attached terrace 4.72 square meters plus utility terrace 2.16 square meters on fourth floor of A building, Legacy Aura constructed on S. No. 48/4 to 10 at village Rahatani, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶36

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

¶37

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶38

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

¶39

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 09.10.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶40

Sanap ( OA No. 1257/2023 ) 5 of 5

State Bank of India v. Somnath Khandekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Somnath Khandekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Manik

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Vvr Infra Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus Unique Enterprises Prop. Mrs. Nilofar Iliyas Shaikh

Bank of India versus Anna Sondage

Yes Bank versus Mukund Appasaheb Devkate

Bank of India versus Sampat