Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe

DRT7 Nov 2025OA/292/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of an agricultural loan and future interest against respondents who failed to appear. The court adjusted the future interest rate to 9% per annum and secured the decree by the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay Rs. 20,67,603/- with future interest at 9% per annum from filing date; property mortgaged under Mah. State Finance Act s. 5 (1) to secure payment; Right to sell property.

Union Bank of India versus Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 20.09.2023 Registered on: 22.04.2024 Decided on: 07.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 02 01 17

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 292/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 20,67,603/-

¶4

Union Bank of India,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and 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 Kolpewadi, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar, through its Power of Attorney, Mr. Kapil s/o Vijaysingh Bilwal (Law Officer), Age: 34 years, Occ.: Service, R/o. Station Road, Aurangabad 431005.

… Applicant

Versus

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1. Mr. Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o.: At 554, Biroba Mandir, Chari No. 5, Kolpe Vasti, Kolpewadi, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar 423602.

¶12

AND/OR

¶13

Mr. Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o.: At Gut No. 125/1, Shahajapur, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar 423602.

¶14

2. Mr. Gangarao Tryambank Dhygude,

¶15

Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o.: At 554, Biroba Mandir, Chari No. 5, Kolpe Vasti, Kolpewadi, Tq. Kopargaon, …Defendants Dist. Ahmednagar 423602.

¶16

APPEARANCES

¶17

For the Applicant Mr. K. D. Pande -Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶18

JUDGMENT Delivered on 07.11.2025

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 20,67,603/- ( Rupees Twenty Lacs, Sixty

¶20

Seven Thousand, Six Hundred and Three only), along with future

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 20.09.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶25

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶26

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Agri. Term loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Agri. Term loan facility of Rs. 11,91,000/- vide sanction letter dated 21.11.2014 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facility was @11.50% 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

¶28

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant No. 1 executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, letter of undertaking,

¶29

hypothecation agreement, demand promissory note, letter of

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

continuity, Annexure (Anusuchi) executed u/s. 5 (1) of Maharashtra State Finance Act 1974 dated 03.11.2014 etc., in

¶34

favour of the applicant bank. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee dated 21.11.2014 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶35

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant created first charge over his immovable property under Annexure (Anusuchi) executed u/s. 5 (1) of Maharashtra State Finance Act 1974 dated 03.11.2014 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property-

¶36

All that piece & parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 2 H 42 R out of Gut No. 125/1, situated at Shahajapur, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar which is bounded as under:

¶37

East: Gut NO. 126, 127, 102, West: Gut No. 122, 101, South: Gut No. 101, North: Gut No. 123.

¶38

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to

¶39

keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 31.03.2023. Therefore, on 27.07.2023 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.

¶44

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through court commissioner. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 07.04.2025.

¶45

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Kapil Vijaysingh Bilwal, Power of Attorney Holder of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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.

¶50

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

¶51

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.

¶52

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

¶53

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.50% p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 20.09.2023 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 @

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(A) Original Application No. 292/2024 is allowed with

¶60

costs.

¶61

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 20,67,603/- ( Rupees Twenty Lacs, Sixty Seven Thousand, Six Hundred and Three only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 20.09.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶62

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable property. Vide Anusuchi executed u/s. 5 (1) of Maharashtra State ct 1974 dated 03.11.2014 at Exh. A-9 in the list of documents Exh. 5.

¶63

All that piece & parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 2 H 42 R out of Gut No. 125/1, situated at Shahajapur,

(OA No.292/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar which is bounded as under:

¶68

East: Gut NO. 126, 127, 102, West: Gut No. 122, 101, South: Gut No. 101, North: Gut No. 123.

¶69

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods

¶70

etc., to recover its dues.

¶71

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶72

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

¶73

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.07.11.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶76

(OA No.292/2024)

¶77

Page 8 of 8

¶78

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Babasaheb Changdeo Kolpe

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Rohit Sudhakar Thorat

Punjab National Bank versus Zakir Iqbal Kachchi

Punjab National Bank versus Bhagchand Rambhau Pandule

State Bank of India versus Mohammad Javed Ali

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus Ghanshyam S/o Davhale Dnyanbarao

State Bank of India versus Sudhakar Sitaram Patil