Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Aviraj Arun Marathe

DRT13 Oct 2025OA/137/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's application to recover an education loan. The court decreed the principal amount plus future interest at 9% per annum, confirming the right to sell mortgaged/despohanted property for recovery.

What did the court decide?

Decree for principal of Rs. 23,18,357.08 plus future interest at 9% p.a. secured by equitable mortgage; direction to sell mortgaged property; issue Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Baroda versus Aviraj Arun Marathe — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 25.10.2021 Registered on: 03.06.2022 Decided on: 13.10.2025 Duration: Y M D 03 11 18

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 137/2022

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 23,18,357.08/-

¶4

Bank of Baroda ,

¶5

A body corporate constituted under the under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, and having its Head Office at Mandavi, Baroda and Branch amongst of the other places at Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani through its Power of Attorney Mr. Vijay Baliram Patil (Chief Manager) Age: 39 yrs., Occ: Service, R/o. Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Mr. Aviraj Arun Marathe, Age- Major, Occ.: Business, “Shivai” Maratha Estate, Ramkrishna Nagar, Basmath Road, Parbhani – 431401.

¶9

2. Mr. Arun Shivdas Marathe, Age- Major, Occ.: Business,

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

“Shivai” Maratha Estate, Ramkrishna Nagar, Basmath Road, Parbhani – 431401.

¶14

Also at

¶15

Mr. Arun Shivdas Marathe, Age- Major, Occ.: Business, Marathe Builders and Developer, Office No. 34, Stadium Complex, Station Road, Parbhani – 431401. …Defendants

¶16

APPEARANCES

¶17

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶18

Mr. K. D. Pande - Advocate Ex-parte

¶19

JUDGMENT Delivered on 13.10.2025

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,18,357.08/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Eighteen Thousand, Three Hundred Fifty Seven And Eight paisa only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 25.10.2021, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶25

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Education Loan. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Education Loan of Rs. 10,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 10.03.2008 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facility was @ 13.50% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶26

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, demand promissory note, letter of undertaking, title deeds dated 12.03.2008, hypothecation agreement, etc. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

for defendant No. 1 and executed a deed of guarantee dated

¶31

12.03.2008 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶32

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the loan facilities sanctioned, the Defendant created first charge over his immovable property thereby depositing title deed/ sale deed dated 20.08.1991. The mortgage was created in respect of the

¶33

following immovable property:

¶34

All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 36, admeasuring 378 sq. mtrs., Machine Cared No. 17686 out of Survey No. 303, CTS No. 1768, situated at Shivram Nagar, Basmath Road, Parbhani, Tq. And Dist. Parbhani, which is bounded as under: East: 9 mtr. Wide road, West: Plot No. 37, South: 7.5 mtr. Wide road, North: Open Space.

¶35

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by tham 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

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 16.05.2016. Therefore, on 02.09.2021 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶40

The defendants appeared in matter but failed to file written statement. Hence, the right of defendants to file written statement stands closed as per Order dated 18.10.2023.

¶41

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Vijay Baliram Patil, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-25 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶46

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.

¶47

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

¶48

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @13.25% p.a. from the date of filing i.e. 25.10.2021 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% (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 137/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶54

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 23,18,357.08/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Eighteen Thousand, Three Hundred Fifty Seven And Eight paisa only), along with future interest @ 9% p.a. (simple), from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 25.10.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶55

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by equitable mortgage of following immovable property by depositing of sale deed dated 20.08.1991 at Exh. A-9 of list of documents Exh. 5.

¶56

All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 36, admeasuring 378 sq. mtrs., Machine Card No. 17686 out of Survey No. 303, CTS No. 1768, situated at Shivram Nagar, Basmath Road, Parbhani, Tq. And Dist. Parbhani, which is bounded as under:

(OA No.137/2022)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

East: 9 mtr. Wide road, West: Plot No. 37, South: 7.5 mtr. Wide road, North: Open Space.

¶61

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods

¶62

etc., to recover its dues.

¶63

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶64

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

¶65

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶66

Sd/-

¶67

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.13.10.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶68

(OA No.137/2022)

¶69

Page 8 of 8

¶70

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Baroda v. Aviraj Arun Marathe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Aviraj Arun Marathe

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 Manisha Hiraman Bedse

Ms Siddheshwar Krushi Seva Kendra versus Bank of Maharashtra

State Bank of India versus Akhil Sharad Khandelwal

Union Bank of India versus Balaji Nivrutti Ankush

Punjab National Bank versus M/s. Jay Tuljabhavani Stone Crusher

Union Bank of India versus Bhatu Soma Wankhede