Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Mahalaxmi Services Prop Smt Shubhangi Tanaji Salvi

DRT6 Nov 2025OA/331/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Original application for recovery of loan dues filed by Karnataka Bank Ltd against mortgagors and guarantors. Defendants failed to appear. Tribunal allowed application, adjusted claim, and directed payment of principal with future interest at 9%.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 67,36,101/- with future interest @9% p.a. from filing date. Recovery directed via sale of mortgaged properties and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus M/S Mahalaxmi Services Prop Smt… — Money Laundering | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 10.01.2022 Registered on: 29.03.2022 Decided on: 06.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 03 09 26

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri. Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.331/2022

¶3

Karnataka Bank Ltd .,

¶4

A Scheduled Bank, formed and registered under the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1913 as Banking Company, having its Registered and Head Office at P.B. No.599, Mahaveera Circle, Kankanady, Mangaluru-575 002, having its Regional Office at Mumbai & having its Branch Office at Kolhapur Branch - SIBER at Shivaji University Road, SIBER Campus, Kolhapur-416 004.

¶5

.. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Smt. Shubhangi Tanaji Salvi W/o (Late) Tanaji Gundappa Salvi Prop. Of Mahalaxmi Services, R/at–HouseNo.395-6-4, Post Bachani Taluka Karveer,, District Kolhapur-416 001.

¶8

Mr. Sambhaji Balu Jadhav R/at–HouseNo.395-6-4, Post Bachani Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur-416 001.

¶9

Smt.Narubhai @ Narmada Jadhav At Post Bachani, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur-416 682.

…Defendants

(OA No.331/2022)

Page 1 of 6

[ ANIL ]

For the Applicant	Mr. I. C. Shetty - Advocate
For the Defendants	Ex-parte.

¶15

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.78,88,151.72Ps.

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

(Delivered on 6^th November, 2025)

¶18

The Applicant Bank has filed the present Application for recovery of amount of Rs.78,88,151.72Ps till 31.12.2021 together with future interest @10% + 5% penal interest p.a. with monthly rests from 01.01.2022 till full repayment /realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶20

Tanaji Gundappa Salvi who was Proprietor of Mahalaxmi Services had applied to enhance the existing Over Draft Limit from Rs.14 lakhs to Rs.25 lakhs to meet his Working Capital requirements. The request of Tanaji Salvi was considered and sanctioned him Working Capital Limit upto Rs.25 lakhs on 08.04.2013 to meet the requirements, on certain terms and condition.

¶21

Tanaji Gundappa Salvi, Proprietor of M/s Shree Mahalaxmi Services is expired on 19.05.2021. Defendant No.1 is wife of deceased Tanaji G. Salvi and Defendant No.2 and 3 were Coobligants and stood as guarantors to the aforesaid facility.

¶22

The defendants have signed and executed loan transaction and security documents on 08.05.2013 as set out in paragraph No.5.5 of the Original Application.

(OA No.331/2022)

Page 2 of 6

[ ANIL ]

Proprietor of M/s Shree Mahalakshmi Services Tanaji Gundappa Salvi and Defendant Nos.1 to 3 have mortgaged the below mentioned immovable properties by executing Registered Deed of Mortgage at Sr. No.2264/2013 in continuation of Deed of Mortgage dated 29.08.2012 and 22.01.2009.

¶27

Mortgaged immovable Properties:-

¶28

(i)- All that piece and parcel of Residential House bearing CS No.508, Gram Panchayat Milkat No.519/2, situated at village Bachani Post, Karveer Taluka, Kolhapur District, comprising the land below admeasuring about 72.93 sq. mtrs alongwith building constructed thereon;

¶29

(ii)- All that piece and parcel of Residential Bungalow bearing R.S.No.242, Hissa No.9 to 13, Plot No.178, admeasuring about 50 sq. mtrs which includes RCC Building measuring about 22.30 sq. mtrs situated at new Kanerkar Nagar, A-Ward, Balinga, Kolhapur;

¶30

(iii)- All that piece and parcel of Residential Open Plot No.21 & 22 admeasuring about 85.25 sq. mtrs & 83.50 sq. mtrs respectively bearing R.S. No.310/1 & 310/2 at Golden Ring, village Boramani, Taluka South Solapur, Solapur, Hyderabad road, Solapur;

¶31

(iv)- All that piece and parcel of Residential Open Plots bearing No.34 and 35 R.S. No.972 and 973, admeasuring 70.10 sq. mtrs. and 72.80 sq. mtrs respectively at village Mouje Parite, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur, more particularly mentioned in Schedule-A of the Original Application.

(OA No.331/2022)

Page 3 of 6

[ ANIL ]

The applicant Bank contended that after availing the above said loan facilities, defendants failed and neglected to repay the loan amount and also failed to regularize loan account. Therefore, the applicant bank classified the account of defendant No.1 as Non-Performing Asset on 27.11.2014.

¶36

Thereafter, the Applicant Bank issued Demand Notices dated 18.07.2014 & 07.12.2026 to the defendants calling upon them to pay entire dues with future interest and penal interest. Despite issuance of two Demand Notices, defendants failed and neglected to respond to said Notices.

¶37

Hence, this application is filed.

¶38

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence the application proceeded ex-parte against them vide Order dated 19.06.2024 below the application (Exhibit-1).

¶39

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Vijay Vishnu Ghatage, Branch Manager, which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶40

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/15) which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶41

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

(OA No.331/2022)

Page 4 of 6

[ ANIL ]

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.

¶46

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.11,31,768.82Ps. and Incidental /other charges Rs.20,281.50Ps in the Loan account, (Total Rs.11,52,050/-), which cannot be granted & these amounts are required to be deducted from the total claim amounts. Thus, the total claim amount shall be reduced from Rs.78,88,151.72Ps to Rs.67,36,101/-.

¶47

Applicant Bank claimed future interest @10%p.a.+5% penal interest for the availed Loan. However, considering facts of the case, I am of opinion that if future interest is granted @9% (simple) for the loan availed, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶48

ORDER

¶49

(A) Original Application No.331/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶50

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 shall jointly and severally pay to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs . 67,36,101 /- (Rupees Sixty-Seven Lakhs Thirty-six Thousand One Hundred One only) towards Overdraft Loan Account No.4337000600000401 with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.10.01.2022 till full realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶51

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting Registered Deed of mortgage of immovable properties i.e.

(OA No.331/2022)

Page 5 of 6

[ ANIL ]

(iii)- All that piece and parcel of Residential Open Plot No.21 and 22 admeasuring about 85.25 sq. mtrs and 83.50 sq. mtrs respectively bearing R.S. No.310/1 & 310/2 at Golden Ring, village Boramani, Taluka South Solapur, Solapur, Hyderabad road, Solapur;

¶58

(iv)- All that piece and parcel of Residential Open Plots bearing No.34& 35 R.S. No.972 and 973, admeasuring 70.10 sq. mtrs. & 72.80 sq. mtrs at village Mouje Parite, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur, more particularly mentioned in Schedule-A of the Original Application.

¶59

(D) The applicant is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶60

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶61

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

¶62

Place : Pune Date : 06.11.2025

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

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

¶65

(OA No.331/2022)

¶66

Page 6 of 6

¶67

[ ANIL ]

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Mahalaxmi Services Prop Smt Shubhangi Tanaji Salvi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. M/S Mahalaxmi Services Prop Smt Shubhangi Tanaji Salvi

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

Hdfc Bank versus M/S J.K. Jewell Prop. J K Gundesha HUF

Uco Bank versus Digambar Shinde

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Limited versus M/S. Trident Industries

Uco Bank versus Dattu alias Dattatraya Nagave

Canara Bank versus Bharat Dhokane

Bank of India versus Dhanaji