Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Navnath

DRT5 Feb 2025OA/1618/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the recovery application filed by Union Bank of India against five defendants for outstanding term loan dues totaling approximately 27 lakhs. The bank proved its case via documents while defendants were absent. The Tribunal granted relief at 9% simple interest instead of the claimed 11.30%. A recovery certificate was issued.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs.1,78,487/- and Rs.25,32,664/- with future interest @ 9% p.a. simple. Recovery Certificate issued. Applicants entitled to sell mortgaged properties.

Union Bank of India versus Navnath — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 17.07.2023 Registered on: 08.12.2023 Decided on: 05.02.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 06 18

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1618/2023.

¶3

Union Bank of India

¶4

Having its branch office at – Chikhalthan, House No.150, At & Post Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur-413 202.

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. Mr. Navnath Narayan Labde

¶7

Age adult, Occ.:-Agri. & Business, R/at Post Shetphal, Tal. Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

¶8

… Applicant

¶9

2. Mrs. Shaila Gorakh Labde

¶10

Age Adult, Occ.- Agri. & Business, R/at Post Shetphal, Tal. Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

¶11

3. Mr. Gorakh Narayan Labde

¶12

Age Adult, Occ.- Agri. & Business R/at Post Shetphal, Tal. Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

¶13

4. Mr. Mahadeo Shankar Gund

¶14

Age Adult, Occ.- Agri. & Business R/at Post Shetphal, Tal. Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

¶15

5. Mr. Baburao Vitthal Gund

¶16

Age Adult, Occ.- Agri. & Business R/at Post Shetphal, Tal. Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

…Defendants

(OA No.1618/2023)

Page 1 of 6

[ANIL]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶23

Advocate Mr. Srinivas Y. Ex-parte

¶24

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.27,11,151/-.

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

(Delivered on 5^th February, 2025)

¶27

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,11,151/- (i.e.Rs.1,78,487/- towards Term Loan Account No.476606040001312) and Rs.25,32,664/- towards Term Loan Account No.476606040001324) with future interest @11.30% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of this Application till repayment/realization of the entire dues from the respective defendants.

¶28

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶29

The Applicant Bank states that Defendant No.1 approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Term Loan Facilities, which were sanctioned by the Applicant, as under:-

¶30

Sr. No.	Loan Facility	Sanction Amount	Sanction Date
1	Term Loan Facility for Banana Crop& Pipeline.	Rs.80,000/-	25.06.2009
2	Term Loan Facility for WorkingCapital.	Rs.08,03,000/-	10.09.2009

¶31

Defendant Nos.4 and 5 agreed to stand as guarantors to the above Term loan Accounts.

(OA No.1618/2023)

Page 2 of 6

[ANIL]

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facilities, the defendants have executed loan and security documents as set out in Para Nos.5.3.2; 5.4.2 and 5.4.4 of the Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank.

¶36

So also, the Defendants have secured the above said loan accounts by executing deed of declaration and thereby creating charge of the applicant bank on the immovable properties - all that piece and parcel of the properties bearing (i)- Survey No.215, admeasuring about 01H 05R, (ii)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.2, adm. about 00H 62R, (iii)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.1b adm. About 00H 63R, (iv)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.2 adm. About 00H 62 R,(v)Survey No.121, Hissa No.2 adm. About 00H 96R lying and situated at village Shetphal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.4.4 of the Original Application.

¶37

The Applicant Bank contended that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities Defendant Nos.1 to 3 adhere to the terms and conditions of the sanction and failed to pay the installments in the Term Loan account and committed breach of the sanction terms and hence, the said accounts of the Defendants with the Applicant Bank became Non-Performing Asset on 30.09.2019 as per the Reserve Bank of India norms. Thereafter, the Applicant Bank issued Notice dated 17.08.2022 through its Advocate Srinivas B. Yelery to the Defendants calling upon them to pay the outstanding due loan amount together with interest, costs, charges and expenses, but

(OA No.1618/2023)

Page 3 of 6

[ANIL]

failed to pay the due amount.

¶42

Hence, this application is filed.

¶43

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per order dated 03.02.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶44

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Padmaraj Shashikant Jirage, Branch Manager and produced on record the Original Loan Transaction documents at Exhibit Nos.AW1 to AW-20, which corroborates case of the Applicant Bank.

¶45

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 evidence of the Applicant Bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs claimed.

¶47

Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.30% p.a for both loan facilities. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for both the loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶48

10 Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(A) Original Application No.1618/2023 is allowed with costs.

(OA No.1618/2023)

Page 4 of 6

[ANIL]

(B) Defendant Nos.1, 4 & 5 either jointly or severally shall pay amount of Rs.1,78,487/- ( Rupees One Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Seven Only) towards Term Loan Account No. 476606040001312) with future interest @9% p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e17.07.2023 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶55

(C) Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 either jointly or severally shall pay amount of Rs.25,32,664/- ( Rupees Twenty Five Lakh Thirty Two Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Four Only) towards Term Loan Account No.476606040001324) with future interest @ 9% p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 17.07.2023 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶56

(D) The aforesaid adjudicated amounts are secured by executing deed of declaration and thereby creating charge of the applicant bank on the immovable property i.e. - all that piece and parcel of the properties bearing (i)- Survey No.215, admeasuring about 01H 05R, (ii)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.2, adm. about 00H 62R, (iii)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.1b adm. About 00H 63R, (iv)- Survey No.218, Hissa No.2 adm. About 00H 62 R,(v)- Survey No.121, Hissa No.2 adm. About 00H 96R lying and situated at village Shetphal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.4.4 of the Original Application.

(OA No.1618/2023)

Page 5 of 6

[ANIL]

(E) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover the dues.

¶61

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶62

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

Sd/-

Place : Pune

Date: 05.02.2025

(Dilip G. Murumkar) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶67

(OA No.1618/2023)

¶68

Page 6 of 6

¶69

[ANIL]

Union Bank of India v. Navnath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Navnath

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

Bank of India versus Neurostar Hospital Private Limited

Bank of India versus Sangramsinh

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited versus Ranjit Jadhav

Indian Overseas Bank versus Nilesh Ransingh

Bank of Maharashtra versus Pushpa Bansode

Federal Bank versus Bharat Shedbale