Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sudhakar Sitaram Patil

DRT7 Nov 2025OA/384/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of Rs. 59.10 lakhs outstanding from defaulting borrowers. The Tribunal issued a recovery certificate securing the debt against mortgaged immovable property and permitted the sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 59.10 lakhs with 9% simple interest from date of filing; sale of hypothecated property permitted.

State Bank of India versus Sudhakar Sitaram Patil — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 14.12.2023 Registered on: 03.06.2024 Decided on: 07.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 10 23

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 384/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 59,10,107/-

¶4

State Bank of India (SARB), is a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India (SARB), Act, 1955, having a SME Branch, at Aurangabad, through its CCO Mrs. Kavita Vasudeo Khalse, Age: 36 yrs., Occ.: Service, SARB, Aurangabad, R/o. Aurangabad.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mr. Sudhakar Sitaram Patil, Age: Major, Occ. Business, R/o. Pimplekotha, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon, Maharashtra-425103.

¶8

2. Mr. Vijay Bhaidas Patil, Age: Major, Occ. Business, R/o. Pimplekotha, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon, Maharashtra-425103.

¶9

3. Mr. Nathu Sitaram Patil,

¶10

Age: Major, Occ. Business, R/o. Pimplekotha, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon, Maharashtra-425103.

…Defendants

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶17

Mr. A. L. Muley -Advocate Ex-parte

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Delivered on 07.11.2025

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶21

recovery of a sum of Rs. 59,10,107/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lacs, Ten Thousand, One Hundred and Seven only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 14.12.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶23

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 and 2 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for KCC loan facility & ATL NHB Cultivation of fruits. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned KCC loan facility of Rs. 2,37,000/- & ATL NHB Cultivation of fruits of Rs. 14,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

24.06.2010 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of

¶28

interest for aforesaid loan facilities was @ 7% & @13.50% per annum respectively with half yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶29

The applicant bank further states that the defendant approached to the applicant bank for request to restructure of ATL. Upon considering the request and needs of the defendant, the applicant bank restructured Agri. Term Loan (ATL) Facility of Rs. 10,92,293/- on certain terms and conditions.

¶30

¶31

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, arrangement letter, loan – cumhypothecation dated 24.06.2010, revival letter, renewal letter. Additionally defendant No. 3 stood as guarantor for defendant No.

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1 & 2 and executed deed of guarantee on 26.06.2010 &

¶36

04.08.2010 in favor of the applicant bank.

¶37

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the

¶38

aforesaid loan facilities sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by loan – cum-

¶39

hypothecation document dated 24.06.2010, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the

¶40

following property –

¶41

All that piece & parcel of land Gut No. 101, situated at Vasant Nagar, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon, admeasuring area 6 H 32 R.

¶42

The defendants also hypothecated present and future stocks and consumables, moulds, present and future book debts, outstanding monies, receivable claims, bills, contracts, securities, investments, goodwill, right and assets etc.

¶43

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to

¶44

keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard

¶45

to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to

¶46

operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 31.07.2018. Therefore, on 11.10.2023 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶51

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.

¶52

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mrs. Kavita Vasudeo Khalse, City Case Officer & Dy.

¶53

Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-19 along

¶58

with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the

¶59

applicant Bank.

¶60

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

¶61

Since the defendants failed to appear and to file the written statement and did not 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.

¶62

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

¶63

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @13.50% p.a. on aforesaid loans from the date of filing i.e. 14.12.2023 of this application till realization of the claim amount. However,

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future

¶68

interest is granted @ 9% per annum (simple) on outstanding

¶69

amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶70

ORDER

¶71

(A) Original Application No. 384/2024 is allowed with

¶72

costs.

¶73

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 59,10,107/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lacs, Ten Thousand, One Hundred and Seven 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.

¶74

(C)

¶75

¶76

mortgaged of the following immovable properties vide

(OA No.384/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]