Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Mr Rajan Jagannathan Mari

DRT23 Jun 2025OA/1/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Punjab National Bank against two defendants. The bank recovered a loan of Rs. 4.3 lakhs treated as a non-performing asset. The court decreed payment of Rs. 17.68 lakhs with 8.50% future interest and sanctioned sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 17,68,482/- with 8.50% future interest; Recovery Certificate issued; Right to sell mortgaged property granted.

Punjab National Bank versus Mr Rajan Jagannathan Mari — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 10.06.2019 Registered on .. 10.01.2022 Decided on .. 23.06.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 06--00--13

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1/2022.

¶3

Punjab National Bank, Erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce, A banking company constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head office at Harsha Bhawan, E- Block, Cannaught Place, New Delhi 110 001 and branch at – Aundh, Pune 411 007.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 Mr. Rajan Jagannathan Mari, H. No. 493, Dattu Date Chawl, Station Road, Dapodi, Pune 411012.

¶7

2 Sh.Venkateshwara Rao s/o Supa Rao, Flat No. 7, Shree Apartments, Vikas Nagar, Dehu Road, Pune 412101.

¶8

… Defendants

¶9

:- Appearances

¶10

For Applicant Advocate Sudha Koloti. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶11

Sanap ( OA No. 1/2022 ) 1 of 5

¶12

Total Claim Amount – Rs.17,68,482/-

¶13

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 23^rd June, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.17,68,482/- together with future interest @8.50% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application dated 04.03.2005 of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Housing loan facility of Rs.4,30,000/- to defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 04.03.2005. Defendant No.2 and one Shri Ganesh Sawant stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by defendant No.1. Shri Ganesh Sawant is no more, and therefore, the applicant Bank is not claiming any relief against him.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant No.1 has also executed deed of mortgage dated 07.03.2005 in respect of Flat No. 10, Second Floor, Shiv Sai Apartment constructed on Survey No. 111/12B/1

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 1/2022 ) 2 of 5

¶19

and CTS No. 8606 admeasuring about 18000 sq. ft. i.e. 1672.72 sq. meters at village Rahatni Kalewadi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant No.1 made last payment of Rs.15,000/- on 24.06.2009 and thereby again admitted liability.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 30.03.2009, 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 28.01.2019, 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.

¶21

Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 28.04.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Sushant Kumar, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 1/2022 ) 3 of 5

¶25

loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-15 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @8.50% per annum. Considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @8.50% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶29

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A} Original Application No. 1/2022 is allowed with costs. B} Defendant Nos.1 and 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.17,68,482/(Rupees Seventeen Lakhs Sixty Eight Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Two only) along with future interest @8.50% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 10.06.2019 till full

¶32

Sanap ( OA No. 1/2022 ) 4 of 5

¶33

payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶34

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of Flat No. 10, Second Floor, Shiv Sai Apartment constructed on Survey No. 111/12B/1 and CTS No. 8606 admeasuring about 18000 sq. ft. i.e. 1672.72 sq. meters at village Rahatni Kalewadi, Taluka Haveli, District Pune, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.9 of the Original Application.

¶35

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

¶36

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶37

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

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 23.06.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 1/2022 ) 5 of 5

Punjab National Bank v. Mr Rajan Jagannathan Mari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Mr Rajan Jagannathan Mari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Iranna

Union Bank of India versus Sundar

Bank of India versus Ashok Yevale

Central Bank of India versus Nagesh Kamble

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Gajanan

Bank of Maharashtra versus Samadhan