Allowed

State Bank of India v. Sandip Deepak Kalyankar

DRT7 Oct 2025OA/429/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Debts Recovery Tribunal at Aurangabad, the Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of a housing loan defaulting on payments, granting judgment debt and interest secured by mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 28,10,687 with future interest at 7% simple interest from filing date; applicant entitled to sell mortgaged property to recover dues; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Sandip Deepak Kalyankar — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 16.05.2024 Registered on: 12.06.2024 Decided on: 07.10.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 04 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 429/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 28,10,687/-

¶4

STATE BANK OF INDIA,

¶5

State Bank of India (SARB) is a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India (SARB), Act, 1955 having a SME Branch at Tuljapur, through its Manager through Mr. Anupkumar Kashinath Tabhane , Manager, (City Case Officer), SARB, Aurangabad. Age: 42 years, Occ.: Service, R/o. Aurangabad.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Sandip Deepak Kalyankar, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: Plot No. 29, Gut No. 4, Nav Kanchan Co-op, Hsg. Society, Kanchan Nagar, Aurangabad. AND Cargil India Pvt. Ltd., 7^th Floor, south Block, Secred Tower, Jagtap Chowk, Wanowari Pune.

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

2. Deepak Ranganathrao Kalyankar, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: Plot No. 29, Gut No. 4, Nav Kanchan Co-op, Hsg. Society, Kanchan Nagar, Aurangabad.

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant Mr. A.L. Muley Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶16

JUDGMENT Delivered on 07.10.2025

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 28,10,687 /- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs, Ten Thousand, Six Hundred and Eighty Seven only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 16.05.2024, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

That, the Defendant 1 & 2 had approached to the Applicant bank and requested to sanction a Housing Loan. Upon considering the request and need of the defendants, the Applicant Bank

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

sanctioned a Housing Loan Facility of Rs. 13,54,000/- lacs & SBI Top-up Loan of Rs. 10,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 10.01.2018 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facilities was @ 8.35% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendants also agreed to pay an additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶24

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including the sanction letter, letter of arrangement, mortgage deed dated 10.01.2018, loan agreement home top up loan etc., in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶25

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the house loan Facility sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by deposit of registered sale deed no. AGG-1-3774/2015 dated 20.06.2015, in

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property –

¶30

All that piece & parcel of Flat No. C-4, admeasuring area 28.36 sq. mtr., Having Carpet Area and total built up area 47.67 sq. mtrs., stilt second floor, Sdwaroop residency plot no. 16-a, Kanchan Nagar, Co-op Hsg society Kanchan Nagar, Gut No. 02, Nakshtrawadi, Aurangabad standing in the name of respondant No. 1 Sandip Deepak Kalyankar.

¶31

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 24.09.2020. Therefore, on 30.04.2024 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

defendant. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶36

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 05.03.2025.

¶37

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Anupkumar Kashinath Tabhane, City Case Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-12 as per list of documents Exh. 5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶38

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

¶39

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶44

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

¶45

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 8.35% per annum with monthly rests on the loan from the date of filing i.e. 16.05.2024 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 @ 7% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶46

ORDER

¶47

(A) Original Application No. 429/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶48

(B)

¶49

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 28,10,687 /- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lacs, Ten Thousand, Six Hundred and Eighty

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Seven only), along with future interest @ 7% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 16.05.2024 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶54

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgaged of the following immovable property vide registered sale deed no. AGG-1-3774/2015 dated 20.06.2015 as Exh. A-10 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶55

All that piece & parcel of Flat No. C-4, admeasuring area 28.35 sq. mtr., Having Carpet Area and total built up area 47.67 sq. mtrs., stilt second floor, Sdwaroop residency plot no. 16-a, Kanchan Nagar, Co-op Hsg society Kanchan Nagar, Gut No. 02, Nakshtrawadi, Aurangabad standing in the name of respondant No. 1 Sandip Deepak Kalyankar.

¶56

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property to recover its dues.

¶57

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

(OA No.429/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶62

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.07.10.2025

¶65

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

¶66

(OA No.429/2024)

¶67

Page 8 of 8

¶68

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. Sandip Deepak Kalyankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Sandip Deepak Kalyankar

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

Union Bank of India versus Vilasrao Khanderao Shinde

Union Bank of India versus Daulatrao Khanderao Shinde

Union Bank of India versus Suryabhan Ramkrishna Shinde

Union Bank of India versus M/S Shaliesh Traders

Union Bank of India versus Bhimrao Baburao Chabukswar

Union Bank of India versus Anandsing Thansing Rajput