Allowed

Bank of India v. Rekhabai Fand

DRT1 Aug 2025OA/13/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's original application for recovery of dues. The court directed the defaulting borrowers and guarantor to pay the principal amount along with future interest at a reduced rate of 9% per annum, exploiting the mortgaged agricultural property as security.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 11,00,313/- with future interest at 9% p.a.; direction to sell mortgaged property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

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

¶1

Presented on: 21.05.2018 Registered on: 13.01.2023 Decided on: 01.08.2025 Duration: Y M D 07 02 10

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.13/2023.

¶3

BANK OF INDIA ,

¶4

A Banking Companies incorporated under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970 and Banking Company as defined in Section 2 (e) of Recovery of Debts to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and having its Head Office at Star House C-5, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051, having branch office at Kurul Branch, At & Post Kurul, Tal. Mohol, District Solapur- 413 213.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mrs. Rekhabai Digambar Fand Age adult, Occ.- Agriculture,

¶8

2. Mr. Laxman Digambar Fand Age adult, Occ.- Agriculture,

¶9

3. Mr. Digambar Eknath Fand, Age adult, Occ.- Agriculture, All R/at Post Dadpur, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur – 413 253.

¶10

.. Defendants

¶11

APPEARANCES

¶12

For the Applicant Mr. Satyan Jagtap - Advocate. For the Defendants Ex-parte.

(OA No.13/2023)

Page 1 of 6

[ANIL]

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.11,00,312.73Ps.

¶17

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 1^st August, 2025)

¶18

Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.11,00,312.73Ps. [ i.e.Rs.2,11,060.44Ps. towards Cash Credit Facility No.072176310000293 & Rs.8,89,252.29Ps. towards Term Loan Account No.072176210000504 ] together with further interest thereon @9.45% p.a. & @13.75% p.a. respectively from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 21.05.2018 till actual payment and realization of entire dues and costs of the application, from the defendants.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:-

¶20

Defendant Nos.1 and 2 on 14.06.2010 approached to applicant bank and requested for Cash Credit Facility as crop loan. The applicant bank sanctioned Cash Credit of Rs.1.50 Lakhs on 28.06.2020 to the defendants No.1 and 2, on certain terms and conditions. Defendant No.3 stood as guarantor in his personal capacity for Cash Credit Facility of Rs.1.50 lakhs.

¶21

Defendant No.1 & 2 have executed certain loan and security documents in favor of the Applicant Bank at the time of availing Cash Credit Facility of Rs.1.50,000/- as set out in Para No.5.5 of the Original Application.

(OA No.13/2023)

Page 2 of 6

[ANIL]

Defendant Nos.1 and 2 have executed Registered Mortgage Deed of the property i.e. Agricultural land situated at Gat No.101/2 admeasuring area 5H 05R situated at Dadpur, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur on 29.06.2010 in favour of the applicant bank. The said Mortgage Deed is registered in the office of Sub Registrar Mohol at Sr. No.2991/2010 dated 29.06.2010.

¶26

The Defendants again on 01.06.2012 approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Mortgage Loan of Rs.5,00,000/-. Applicant Bank sanctioned Mortgage Term Loan of Rs.5,00,000/- to the defendant Nos.1 and 2 on certain terms and conditions.

¶27

Defendant No.1 & 2 have executed certain loan and security documents in favor of the Applicant Bank at the time of availing Mortgage Loan of Rs.5,00,000/- as set out in Para No.5.9 of the Original Application.

¶28

Defendant No.1 & 2 as a security for repayment of said Mortgage Loan of Rs.5 Lakhs executed registered mortgaged of the property bearing Agricultural land situated at Gat No.101/2 admeasuring area 5H 05R situated at Dadpur, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur on 29.06.2010 in favour of the applicant bank. The said Mortgage Deed is registered in the office of Sub Registrar Mohol at Sr. No.3324/2012 dated 12.07.2012, as set out in Para Nos.5.6 & 5.10 of the Original Application.

(OA No.13/2023)

Page 3 of 6

[ANIL]

It is contended by the Applicant Bank that the Defendants have availed aforesaid Loan facilities sanctioned by the Applicant Bank. However, the defendants were irregular in payment of the Cash Credit Facility & Mortgage Loan and made persistent default in repayment of the said Loans. The applicant bank time and again requested the defendants to repay the loans as per the agreed schedule, but the defendants deliberately and knowingly failed to repay as agreed in spite of repeated requests by the applicant bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank through its Advocate issued Legal Notice dated 20.01.2018 to the Defendants calling upon to pay the outstanding amount. Despite service of the Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to comply with the due demand in the said Loan Recall Notice.

¶33

Hence, this application is filed.

¶34

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant vide Order dated 11.07.2024 passed below the Application (Exh. 01).

¶35

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exh.-6) of Mr. Ashok Kanagi, Branch Manager and produced on record the Original/Office Copies of the Loan Transaction documents at Exhibits AW-1/1 to AW-1/25 which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

(OA No.13/2023)

Page 4 of 6

[ANIL]

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

¶40

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

¶41

9 Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @09.45%p.a. for Cash Credit Facility and @13.75% p.a. for Mortgage Term Loan Facility. Considering the facts of the present case; I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for all the facilities, it would be just and reasonable.

¶42

10 Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(A) Original Application No.13/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶45

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Bank an aggregate sum of Rs.11,00,313/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Three Hundred Thirteen only) [i.e. Rs.2,11,060.44Ps. towards Cash Credit Loan Account No. 072176310000293 and Rs.8,89,252.29Ps. towards Mortgage Term Loan Account No. 072176210000504] with future interest @9.00%p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.21.05.2018 till payment/ realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.13/2023)

Page 5 of 6

[ANIL]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of immovable property i.e. agricultural land situated at Gat No.101/2 admeasuring area 5H 05R situated at Dadpur, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur in favour of the applicant bank, as set out in Para Nos.5.6 & 5.10 of the Original Application.

¶50

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶51

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶52

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

¶53

Place: Pune Date: 01.08.2025

¶54

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

¶55

(OA No.13/2023)

¶56

Page 6 of 6

¶57

[ANIL]

Bank of India v. Rekhabai Fand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Rekhabai Fand

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

Federal Bank versus Shivaji

Federal Bank versus Sunil Goilkar

Union Bank of India versus Siddappa

Punjab National Bank versus M/S. Darshana Transport Prop. Mrs. Surekha Manoj Lunkad

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sambhaji

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S. Jagtap Press Components Prop. Mr. Yogesh Kakasaheb Jagtap