Allowed

Union Bank of India v. New Yash Enterprises

DRT9 Sept 2025OA/21/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of approximately Rs. 47,80,078. The court awarded principal, future interest at 9% p.a., and secured the judgment via mortgage over two immovable properties and hypothecated goods, including the power of sale.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; principal amount of Rs. 47,80,078.14/- awarded with future interest at 9% p.a. (simple); secured by mortgage on specified properties; right to sell mortgaged properties awarded; Recover

Union Bank of India versus New Yash Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 29.10.2021 Registered on: 01.03.2022 Decided on: 09.09.2025 Duration: Y M D 03 10 10

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD

¶3

(Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 21/2022

¶4

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 47,80,078.14/-

¶5

Union Bank of India,

¶6

(A Government of India Undertaking) having its

¶7

Central Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan

¶8

Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400021 And amongst other branches, one of the branch at CTS No. 3292, Sukh

¶9

Niketan, Timber, Market, Opp. Sarvodaya Chatralaya,

¶10

Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal District Jalgaon. Through its Authorized Officer, Jitendra Kumar Sahu, Age: 36 years, Occ.: Service, Authorized Officer of Union Bank of India, Branch at CTS No. 3292, Sukh Niketan,

¶11

Timber, Market, Opp. Sarvodaya Chatralaya,

¶12

Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal District Jalgaon.

… Applicant

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 1 of 10

[AMBADAS]

Versus

New Yash Enterprises, Through its Proprietor, Rehan Jalil Qureshi, Age: 26 years, Occu.: Business R/o.: 841, Nisarwanji File, Bismillah Pahelwan Building, Shivaji Nagar, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶19

Smt. Gita Shankar Zungarekar Age: 46 years, Occu.: Business, R/o.: Plot No. 27, Sunder Nagar, Varangave Road, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶20

Abdul Jalil Abdul Rehman Qureshi, Age: 59 years, Occu.: Business R/o.: 841, Nisarwanji File, Bismillah Pahelwan …Defendants Building, Shivaji Nagar, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶21

Shakil Ahemad Abdul Rehman Qureshi, Age: 255 years, Occu.: Business R/o.: 841, Nisarwanji File, Bismillah Pahelwan Building, Shivaji Nagar, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶22

APPEARANCES

¶23

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶24

Mr. Atul A. Mishra -Advocate Ex-parte

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

JUDGMENT Delivered on 09.09.2025

¶29

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶30

recovery of a sum of Rs. 47,80,078.14/- ( Rupees Forty Seven Lacs, Eighty Thousand, Seventy Eight and Fourteen Paisa only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 29.10.2021, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶31

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶32

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for a Term loan facility & working capital limit. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned a Term loan facility of Rs. 40,00,000/- & working capital limit of Rs. 9,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 14.02.2020 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the Term loan was @11.05% p.a. & for working capital limit was @

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

10.50% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to

¶37

pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in

¶38

the event of any default in repayment.

¶39

Thereafter, the defendant No. 1 again approached the applicant Bank seeking further financial assistance for the purpose of business in form of term loan under UGECL scheme, the Applicant bank pleased to sanction term loan of Rs. 8,00,000/under UGECL scheme vide its sanction letter dated 11.06.2020 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @10.75% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶40

¶41

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, registered mortgage deeds bearing daybook nos. 759 & 1852 dated 15.02.2020 &

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

03.07.2020, letters of undertaking, demand promissory notes,

¶46

letters of continuity & hypothecation agreements. Additionally defendant No. 2 to 4 stood as guarantors for defendant No. 1 and executed deeds of guarantee on 17.02.2020 & 16.06.2021 in

¶47

favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶48

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property under daybook nos. 759 & 1852 dated

¶49

15.02.2020 & 03.07.2020 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶50

All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 35, admeasuring 307.20 sq. mtrs. Survey No. 176/2/1, situated at Kandari, within the limits of Bhusawal Municipal Council, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, District Jalgaon, which is bounded as under:

¶51

East: S. No. 175 West: Plot No. 36 & 37 North: 9 m wide Road South: Open Space.

¶52

All that piece and parcel of CTS No. 2884/B/3, admeasuring 689.3 sq. mtrs., thereon building, Municipal House No. 3/316, 3/768 and 3/767 within the limits of Municipal Council,

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, District Jalgaon, which is bounded as under:

¶57

East: Bole West: Road North: Road South: Nala.

¶58

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 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 29.07.2021. Therefore, on 30.07.2021 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

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

application is filed.

¶63

The defendants appeared in matter but failed to submit written statement. Hence, the right of defendants to file written statement stand close as per Order dated 18.07.2023

¶64

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Jitendra Kumar Sahu, Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Annexure A-1 to A-25 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶65

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

¶66

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.

¶67

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable properties of the borrowers which are mortgaged in favour of

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

the applicant bank.

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @10.75 p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 29.10.2021 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.

¶73

ORDER

¶74

(A) Original Application No. 21/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶75

(B) The defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 47,80,078.14/- ( Rupees Forty Seven Lacs, Eighty Thousand, Seventy Eight and Fourteen Paisa only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O. A. i.e. 29.10.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶76

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties bearing daybook nos. 759 & 1852 vide registered

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

mortgage deeds dated 15.02.2020 & 03.07.2020 at

¶81

annexure A-11 & A-23 respectively in list of documents

¶82

Exh. 5.

¶83

All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 35, admeasuring 307.20 sq. mtrs. Survey No. 176/2/1, situated at Kandari, within the limits of Bhusawal Municipal Council, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, District Jalgaon, which is bounded as under:

¶84

East: S. No. 175 West: Plot No. 36 & 37 North: 9 m wide Road South: Open Space.

¶85

All that piece and parcel of CTS No. 2884/B/3, admeasuring 689.3 sq. mtrs., thereon building, Municipal House No. 3/316, 3/768 and 3/767 within the limits of Municipal Council, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, District Jalgaon, which is bounded as under:

¶86

East: Bole West: Road North: Road South: Nala.

¶87

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and hypothecated

¶88

articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

(OA No.21/2022)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶93

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

¶94

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶95

Sd/-

¶96

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.09.09.2025

¶97

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶98

(OA No.21/2022)

¶99

Page 10 of 10

¶100

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. New Yash Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. New Yash Enterprises

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

State Bank of India versus Anand Govindrao Tipperse

Hdfc Bank versus Bramhadev Ankush Veer

Sunita Kailas Shelke versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S Gokul Foods Products

Maharashtra Gramin Bank versus Katneshwar Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Sanjay Namdev Gaikwad