Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Daga Ananda Patil

DRT4 Dec 2025OA/159/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dr. J. R. Chauhan, Presiding Officer at the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad, allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of dues. Being ex-parte as defendants did not appear, the court enforced the mortgage and granted recovery of the principal sum plus 9% future interest.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; Defendants to pay Rs. 27,35,270.36 plus 9% simple interest; Mortgage property secured; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Daga Ananda Patil — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 25.02.2025 Registered on: 12.03.2025 Decided on: 04.12.2025 Duration: Y M D 00 09 09

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 159/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 27,35,270.36/-

¶4

Union Bank of India, A Body Corporate constituted

¶5

under the Banking companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Registered office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Main Branch, Dhule through its Authorized Person, Mr. Bhatusing Shamsing Thakur (Branch Head), Age: 40 yrs., Occ.:

¶6

Service, R/o. Station Road, Dhule.

… Applicant

Versus

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1. Mr. Daga Ananda Patil, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri. R/o.: At Post Khandlav Kh., Tq. & Dist. Dhule, 424001.

¶13

2. Mr. Deoram Ganpat Patil, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri. R/o.: At Post Khandlav Kh., Tq. & Dist. Dhule, 424001.

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶16

…Defendants

¶17

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

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Delivered on 04.12.2025

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 27,35,270.36/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs, Thirty Five Thousand, Two Hundred Seventy and Thirty Six Paisa only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 25.02.2025, until the date of realization

¶21

of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for a Term loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned a Term loan facility of Rs. 5,40,000/vide sanction letter dated 16.09.2009 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @11.75% p.a. with half yearly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶27

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, registered mortgage deed bearing daybook no. 3886 dated 16.09.2009, letter of undertaking, demand promissory note, & hypothecation agreement. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for defendant No.

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1 and executed deed of guarantee on 17.09.2009 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶32

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant No. 1 created first charge over his immovable property under daybook no. 3886 dated 16.09.2009 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property-

¶33

All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 3 Hector 25 R, out of Gut No. 31/1, situated at Village Khandlay Kh., Tq. & Dist. Dhule., which is bounded as under. East: Gut No. 32, West: Gut No. 130, South: Gut No. 38, North: Gut No. 30.

¶34

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them 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.159/2025)

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 30.03.2023. Therefore, on 12.02.2025 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶39

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through paper publication. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 03.10.2025

¶40

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Bhatusingh s/o. Shamsing Thakur, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-16 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶45

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.

¶46

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

¶47

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.50% p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 25.02.2025 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% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 159/2025 is allowed with

¶53

costs.

¶54

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 27,35,270.36/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Lacs, Thirty Five Thousand, Two Hundred Seventy and Thirty Six Paisa only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Aplication i.e. 25.02.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶55

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable property bearing daybook no. 3886 vide registered simple mortgage deed dated 16.09.2009 at Exh. A-6 in list of documents Exh. 5.

(OA No.159/2025)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

South: Gut No. 38, North: Gut No. 30.

¶61

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged

¶62

immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods 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:.04.12.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶68

(OA No.159/2025)

¶69

Page 8 of 8

¶70

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Daga Ananda Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Daga Ananda 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

Idbi Bank versus M/s Mansee Labour Suppliers

Canara Bank versus Shri. Shivaji Ramchandra Pawar

Ms Mauli Krushi Seva Kendra versus Bank of Maharashtra

Union Bank of India versus Anirudha Laxmanrao Khotkar

Union Bank of India versus Janardhan Laxmanrao Khotkar

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Krishna Laxmanrao Khotkar