Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Haji Shakoor Ayub Saya

DRT19 Sept 2025OA/368/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal application, State Bank of India sought recovery of approximately Rs. 34.42 lakh principal and future interest from defaulting borrowers who failed to repay a sanctioned cash credit facility. The tribunal allowed the application ex-parte due to the defendants' absence, granting principal recovery and fixing future interest at 9% per annum simple, while declaring the

What did the court decide?

Direct payment of Rs. 34,42,638/- with future interest at 9% simple p.a.; securing recovery against mortgaged property and hypothecated goods; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus M/S Haji Shakoor Ayub… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 14.12.2023 Registered on: 01.06.2024 Decided on: 19.09.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 09 05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 368/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 34,42,638/-

¶4

STATE BANK OF INDIA,

¶5

State Bank of India (SARB) is a body corporate

¶6

constituted under the State Bank of India (SARB), Act,

¶7

1955 having a SME Branch at Parbhani, through its

¶8

Manager through Mr. Bashir Kazi , Manager, (City Case Officer), SARB, Aurangabad. Age: 36 years, Occ.:

¶9

… Applicant

¶10

Service, R/o. Aurangabad.

Versus

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1. M/s. Haji Shakoor Ayub Saya, Through its Prop. Mr. Mohammad Ashraf Haji Shakook Saya Age: Major, Occ.: Business, R/o.: Ashruf Mansion Kacchi Bazar, Dist. Parbhan-431401.

¶16

2. Mr. Gazi Mohd Ajaj,

¶17

Age: Major, Occ.: Business, R/o.: Near Dargah, Kacchi Bazar, Dist. Parbhan-431401.

¶18

3. Mr. Bhesania Muhamad Rifaquat Abdul Razak

¶19

Age: Major, Occ.: Business, R/o.: Near Dargah, Kacchi Bazar, Dist. Parbhan-431401.

¶20

…Defendants

¶21

APPEARANCES

¶22

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶23

Mr. A.L. Muley Advocate Ex-parte

¶24

JUDGMENT Delivered on 19.09.2025

¶25

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶26

recovery of a sum of Rs. 34,42,638 /- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs, Forty Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Thirty Eight only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Application, i.e., 14.12.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶31

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶32

That, the Defendant 1 to 3 had approached to the Applicant bank and requested to sanction a Cash Credit Facility. Upon considering the request and need of the defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned a Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 20 lacs for business purpose vide sanction letter dated 08.01.2019 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest was @ 12.15% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendants also agreed to pay an additional interest by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶33

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including the sanction letter, letter of undertaking, title deed dated 08.01.2019 etc. Additionally defendant No. 2 & 3 stood as

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

guarantor and executed a deed of guarantee on 08.01.2019 in

¶38

favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶39

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the Cash Credit Facility sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by deposit of title deed dated 08.01.2019, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The

¶40

mortgage was created in respect of the following property –

¶41

All that piece & parcel old house no. 119, New House NO. 142 PR machine card No. 1630, situated in Ward No. 25, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Shivaji Chowk, Parbhani, which is bounded as under: East: - Prop. of Hazi Sattar, West: - Prop. Of Mohd. Ashraj Haji Shakoor, South: - Dr. Ambedkar Road, North:- Property of Dnyaneshwar Wattamwar.

¶42

The applicant bank further states that the defendant executed a hypothecation agreement, thereby hypothecating all present and future stocks and consumables—whether in raw material form, work-in-progress, or finished goods—as well as all other movable

¶43

properties, including consumer durables and related assets.

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 26.09.2021 Therefore, on 19.11.2023 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶48

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 05.02.2025.

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Bashi Kazi, City Case Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-7 as per list of documents Exh. 5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶53

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

¶54

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.

¶55

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

¶56

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 12.15% per annum with monthly rests on the loan from the date of filing i.e. 14.12.2023 of this application till realization of the claim amount.

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 9% per annum (simple), it would

¶61

be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶62

ORDER

¶63

(A) Original Application No. 368/2024 is allowed with

¶64

costs.

¶65

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 34,42,638 /- (Rupees Thirty Four Lacs, Forty Two Thousand, Six Hundred and Thirty Eight only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 14.12.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶66

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgaged of the following immovable property vide documents Exh. A-4 and A-5 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶67

All that piece & parcel old house no. 119/1, New House NO. 142 PR machine card No. 1630, situated in Ward No.

(OA No.368/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

25, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Shivaji Chowk, Parbhani, which is bounded as under:

¶72

East: - Prop. of Hazi Sattar, West: - Prop. Of Mohd. Ashraj Haji Shakoor, South: - Dr. Ambedkar Road, North:- Property of Dnyaneshwar Wattamwar.

¶73

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶74

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶75

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

¶76

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶77

Sd/-

¶78

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.19.09.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶79

(OA No.368/2024)

¶80

Page 8 of 8

¶81

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. M/S Haji Shakoor Ayub Saya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Haji Shakoor Ayub Saya

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 Aurangabad Trade Center

Union Bank of India (Andhra Bank) versus Shaikh Jamil Noor Kalam

State Bank of India versus M/S Ovikiran Petroleum

Punjab National Bank versus Dnyaneshwar Mohan Pathare

Punjab National Bank versus Raosaheb Aapaji Kundade

Canara Bank versus Sonyabapu Sitaram Khamkar