Allowed

Federal Bank v. Tukaram Killedar

DRT24 Jul 2025OA/1574/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte recovery application, the Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for loan dues. The court reduced the penal interest and fixed future interest at 9% per annum, directing defendants to pay the reduced sum secured by mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.22,94,899/- plus future interest at 9% per annum from 12.09.2023; recovery certificate issued; authority to sell mortgaged property granted.

Federal Bank versus Tukaram Killedar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 12.09.2023 Registered on .. 18.11.2023 Decided on .. 24.07.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 01--10--12

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1574/2023.

¶3

The Federal Bank Limited,

¶4

A company incorporated and registered under Indian Companies Act, 2013 (18/2013) and Section 2 (20) of the Companies Act, 2013 (18/2013) and Banking Company under section Section 5(c) of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its registered office at Federal Towers, Bank Junction, Alwaye, Ernakulum District, Kerala and branch office at – Gandhinagar, Ganesh Talkies, Gad Mudshingi, Kolhapur 416 119.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Mr. Tukaram Ganu Killedar, Age 80 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Killedar Galli, At Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad Anap Khurd, District Kolhapur 416 210.

¶8

2 Mrs. Sarasvati Tukaram Killedar, Age 75 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Killedar Galli, At Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad Anap Khurd, District Kolhapur 416 210.

¶9

Sanap ( OA No. 1574/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶10

3 Mr. Balvant Tukaram Killedar, Age 49 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Killedar Galli, At Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad Anap Khurd, District Kolhapur 416 210.

¶11

4 Mr. Chandrakant Tukaram Killedar, Age 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o : Killedar Galli, At Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad Anap Khurd, District Kolhapur 416 210. … Defendants

¶12

:- Appearances

¶13

For Applicant Adv Parth Barsode i/b Adv Nikhil Barsode. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶14

Total Claim Amount – Rs.23,74,983/-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Delivered on 24^th July, 2025)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.23,74,983/- together with future interest @12.83% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶19

As per the loan application of defendants, the applicant sanctioned AMTL of Rs.4,00,000/- for construction of irrigation pipeline and FKCC loan of Rs.6,00,000/- for cultivation of crops like sugarcane, soyabean to the defendants vide Sanction Letter dated 29.01.2016.

¶20

Sanap ( OA No. 1574/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶21

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of mortgage dated 06.02.2016 in respect of Agri land bearing Gat Nos. 8, 28, 249, 414, 433, 504, 553, 497 and residential property admeasuring 800 sq. ft. out of GPP No.221 at Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad, District Kolhapur in favour of applicant. On 18.01.2022, the defendants have also executed balance confirmation letter and confirmed balance outstanding in loan accounts.

¶22

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 30.01.2019, 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 30.06.2023, 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.

¶23

Hence, this application is filed.

¶24

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 02.05.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶25

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Satish Ramchandra Tikale, Senior Manager

¶26

Sanap ( OA No. 1574/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶27

and Authorized Signatory of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-20 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant.

¶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.80,084/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.23,74,983/- is reduced to Rs.22,94,899/-.

¶32

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.83% 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. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶33

Sanap ( OA No. 1574/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

A} Original Application No. 1574/2023 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶36

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.22,94,899/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Ninety Four Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Nine only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 12.09.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶37

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of Agricultural land bearing Agri land bearing Gat Nos. 8, 28, 249, 414, 433, 504, 553, 497 and residential property admeasuring 800 sq. ft. out of GPP No.221 at Palyacha Huda, Taluka Bhudargad, District Kolhapur, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.6(5) of the Original Application.

¶38

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

¶39

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶40

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

¶41

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 24.07.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶42

Sanap ( OA No. 1574/2023 ) 5 of 5

Federal Bank v. Tukaram Killedar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Tukaram Killedar

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

Federal Bank versus Shankar

Bank of India versus Shivaji Mahadeo Parkad

Hdfc Bank versus M/S. Musali Babasaheb Kalawant Prop Musali Babasaheb Kalawant

Uco Bank versus Mahendra Narutepatil

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Devanand More

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Limited versus M/S Attitude Plastics Private Limited