Allowed

Federal Bank v. Sujata Patil

DRT5 Jul 2025OA/1564/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application for recovery of loan dues. The tribunal acknowledged the default, confirmed evidence of the bank, and awarded the principal amount reduced by disallowed penal interest, subject to 9% annual future interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 25,16,929/- along with future interest at 9% per annum; recovery certificate issued; right to sell mortgaged property granted.

Federal Bank versus Sujata Patil — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 18.04.2023 Registered on .. 18.11.2023 Decided on .. 05.07.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 02--02--17

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1564/2023.

¶3

The Federal Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company within the meaning of Companies Act, 2013 (18/2013), having its registered office at Federal Towers, Alwaye, Kerala and branch at – 151, Railway Line, Dufferin Chowk, Solapur 413 001.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Mrs. Sujata Bharat Patil, Age 44 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : A/p Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur 431 202.

¶8

2 Mr. Prajyot Bharat Patil, Age 25 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : A/p Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur 431 202.

¶9

3 Mr. Bharat Sukhadev Patil, Age 52 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : A/p Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur 431 202.

¶10

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 1 of 7

¶11

4 Mr. Nagnath Balbhim Jadhav, Age 52 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : A/p Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur 431 202. … Defendants

¶12

:- Appearances

¶13

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

¶14

Total Claim Amount – Rs.25,87,771/-

¶15

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 05^th July, 2025)

¶16

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.25,87,771/- together with future interest for AMTL Account @10.50% per annum, for Prathyasha Account @12.80% per annum and for FKCC Account @10.30% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶17

Brief facts of the application are as under :- Defendant No.1 is principal borrower. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 offered their property as security and defendant Nos. 2 to 4 supplemented the request for loan.

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 2 of 7

¶19

As the loan of the per application defendants, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term Loan AMTL of Rs.10,00,000/for land development, CC direct Agri FKCC Loan for Rs.4,00,000/- for Crop Cultivation and Federal Prathyasha Loan of Rs.1,00,000/- to the defendants vide Sanction Letters dated 17.10.2016 and 01.12.2016.

¶20

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have also executed deed of mortgage dated 06.12.2016 in respect of Agricultural land bearing Gat No. 252 area 40 Ares, Gat No. 251/3 area 94 Ares and Gat No. 251/3 area 2 Hectare at village Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendants have also executed confirmation of balance letters on 30.11.2019 and 22.11.2022 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in the loan accounts.

¶21

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and

¶22

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 3 of 7

¶23

failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 06.12.2019, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, on 09.02.2022, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶24

Hence, this application is filed.

¶25

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded exparte against the defendants as per Order dated 30.04.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶26

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Rajeev Darshan Sharma, Branch Head/ Authorized Signatory holding Power of Attorney on behalf of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1/1 to AW1/19 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶27

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 4 of 7

¶28

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

¶29

Since the defendants 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.

¶30

The applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets, therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶31

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.70,842/- (Rs.67,715/- for AMTL Account + Rs.2,711/- for Prathyasha Account + Rs.416/- for FKCC Account), which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.25,87,771/- is reduced to Rs.25,16,929/-.

¶32

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest for AMTL Account @10.50% per annum, for Prathyasha Account @12.80% per annum and for FKCC Account @10.30% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion

¶33

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 5 of 7

¶34

that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for all loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶35

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

A} Original Application No. 1564/2023 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶38

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.25,16,929/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Nine only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 18.04.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶39

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of Agricultural land bearing Gat No. 252 area 40 Ares, Gat No. 251/3 area 94 Ares and Gat No. 251/3 area 2 Hectare at village Shetfal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.6 of the Original Application.

¶40

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 6 of 7

¶41

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

¶42

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶43

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

¶44

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 05.07.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶45

Sanap ( OA No. 1564/2023 ) 7 of 7

Federal Bank v. Sujata Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Sujata Patil

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

Mohan Shashikant Bhosale Prop of Shrimant Foods and Mrs Archana Bhosale versus Indian Bank

Bank of India versus Mr Shitanshu Mistry

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. Prakash Agro Products Prop. Mr. Samadhan Prakash Sawant

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Milind

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus L v Farms

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Creative Baron-Prop-Mr Akhtar Ali Khan