Allowed

Federal Bank v. Sunita Jagtap

DRT4 Apr 2025OA/1387/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by The Federal Bank Ltd against four agriculturist borrowers for recovery of defaulted loan amounts aggregating to Rs.24,22,820/- reduced from the claimed sum after deducting penal interest, along with future interest at 9% p.a. and permission to sell mortgaged agricultural assets.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; respondents to pay Rs.24,22,820/- with interest at 9% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; Mortgagee empowered to sell mortgaged land.

Federal Bank versus Sunita Jagtap — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 29.04.2023 Registered on: 30.10.2023 Decided on: 04.04.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 11 05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE. (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1387/2023.

¶3

The Federal Bank Ltd .

¶4

A Banking Company within the meaning of Companies Act, 2013 having its Registered Office at Federal Tower, ALWAYE, KERALA and having one of its branches amongst other places at 151, Railway Line, Dufferin Chowk, Solapur-413 001.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mrs. Sunita Ramesh Jagtap

¶8

Age 54 years, Occ.:-Agriculturist,

¶9

2. Mr. Ramesh Kerappa Jagtap

¶10

Age 64 years, Occ.:-Agriculturist,

¶11

3. Mr. Sagar Ramesh Jagtap

¶12

Age 31 years, Occ.:- Agriculturist R/at – Jadhav Vasti, Kurul, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur-413 213.

¶13

4. Mr. Ravsaheb Dagadu Doke

¶14

Age 79 years, Occ.:- Agriculturist All R/at Post Ankoli, Tal.-Mohol, District Solapur-413 253..

… Defendants

(OA No.1387/2023)

Page 1 of 6

[ANIL]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant Mr. G. H. Bet i/b Adv. Nikhil Barsode For the Defendants Ex-parte.

¶21

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.24,66,203.64Ps.

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

(Delivered on 4^th April, 2025)

¶24

Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.24,66,203.64Ps ( i.e. Rs.7,43,620.64Ps towards AMTL A/c No.15936600002958 & Rs.17,22,583/- towards FKCC A/c No.15935500002910) together with future interest thereon @10.90% p.a. & @13.00% p.a. + Penal Interest @4% respectively with monthly rests till actual realization from defendant Nos.1 to 4.

¶25

Brief facts of the application are as under :- Defendant Nos.1 to 4 approached the Applicant Bank on

¶26

30.03.2017 and requested for Loans. The Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan AMTL of Rs.4,00,000/- for land development and CC Direct Agri FKCC Loan for Rs.9,00,000/- for crop cultivation on 30.03.2017, upon certain terms and conditions.

¶27

In order to secure the said Loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan transactions and security documents on 30.03.2017 in favour of the Applicant Bank, as set out in Para No.5.7 of the Original Application.

(OA No.1387/2023)

Page 2 of 6

[ANIL]

Defendant No.1 & 2 have mortgaged the immovable properties duly registered in SRO Mohol at Sr. No.873/2017, on 16.03.2017 i.e. Agricultural land bearing Gat No.438/1 area 2 H 09 Ares, Gat No.485/1/A area 90 Ares and Gat No.427/3 area 3 H 63 Ares at village Ankoli Taluka Mohol, District Solapur, more particularly described in Schedule-I (A,B, & C) of the Original Application.

¶32

So also, the Defendant have hypothecated standing crops and all other movable assets created out of bank finance.

¶33

It is contended that the defendants have also executed Confirmation of Balance Letters dated 16.03.2020 and 14.12.2021 confirming balance due under respective loan accounts. It is further contended that after availing and utilizing both the loan facilities, the defendants have failed to repay the instalments. The Loan accounts of the defendants were irregular and went into defaults. Defendants were called upon to remit overdue and arrears in loan accounts to get the regularized. But the defendants have hardly shown any interest in repayment. Therefore, the loan accounts of the defendants dwindled and classified as NPA on 28.09.2020.

¶34

Thereafter, the Applicant Bank on 14.03.2022 issued Legal Notice to the defendants by RPAD calling upon them to liquidate the dues and close loan accounts. The Defendants failed and neglected to comply with the demand in the said Notice.

¶35

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.1387/2023)

Page 3 of 6

[ANIL]

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against her vide Order dt.20.02.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-01).

¶40

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exh.-6) of Mr. Rajeev Darshan Sharma, Branch Head and Authorized Signatory, which supports the case of the Applicant elucidated in the application.

¶41

The Applicant Bank has produced in evidence the original loan documents at Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/16, which corroborate the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶42

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

¶43

Since the defendants failed to file evidence on record 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.

¶44

The Applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets, as mentioned in Schedule-II of the Original Application. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets. Therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

(OA No.1387/2023)

Page 4 of 6

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.43,384/- for AMTL Account No.15936600002958, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.24,66,203.64Ps is reduced to Rs.24,22,820/-.

¶49

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10.90% p.a. & @13% p.a. + 4% penal interest, respectively. 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.

¶50

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶51

ORDER

¶52

(A) Original Application No.1387/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶53

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay a sum of Rs.24,22,820/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty only) [i.e. Rs.7,00,237/- towards AMTL Account No.15936600002958 & Rs.17,22,583/- towards FKCC Account No.15935500002910] with future interest @9% p.a. (Simple) to the Applicant Bank from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 29.04.2023 till payment / realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.1387/2023)

Page 5 of 6

[ANIL]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by registered Deed of Mortgage before Sub Registrar Office Mohol, District Solapur at Sr. No.873/2017 dated 16.03.2017 in respect of Agricultural land bearing Gat No.438/1 area 2 H 09 Ares; Gat No.485/1/A area 90 Ares and Gat No.427/3 area 3 H 63 Ares at village Ankoli Taluka Mohol, District Solapur, more particularly described in Schedule-I (A, B & C) of the Original Application.

¶58

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

¶59

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶60

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

¶61

Sd/Place: Pune (Dilip G. Murumkar) Date: 04.04.2025 Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶62

(OA No.1387/2023)

¶63

Page 6 of 6

¶64

[ANIL]

Federal Bank v. Sunita Jagtap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Sunita Jagtap

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

Uco Bank versus Dnyandev Mhaske

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. LifeCare Multispeciality Hospital

Canara Bank versus Sudam Jadhav

Punjab National Bank versus Krishnabai Karchre

Mblem Digital versus Uco Bank

Amol Kashinath Gawade versus Union Bank of India