Allowed

Uco Bank v. Ramchandra Nagnath Salgar

DRT3 Sept 2025OA/439/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's application for recovery of ₹31,44,620 along with future interest. The court reduced the claimed future interest rate from 11.70% to 9% per annum. The decree is secured by the mortgaged agricultural land, and the Bank is entitled to issue a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directions to pay ₹31,44,620 with future interest @9% p.a.; secured by mortgage; entitlement to sell mortgaged property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Uco Bank versus Ramchandra Nagnath Salgar — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 29.05.2022 Registered on .. 29.03.2023 Decided on .. 03.09.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--03--05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 439/2023.

¶3

UCO Bank,

¶4

A Corporate Body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 and having its head office at 10, B.T.M. Sarani, Kolkata and branch office at – Vaishnavi Corner, 8742/2, Gold Finch Peth, Opp. Bhagwat Theater, Solapur 413 001.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Shri Ramchandra Nagnath Salgar, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, Residing at :- At & Post Pakami, Taluka North Solapur, District Solapur 413255.

¶8

2 Sou. Padmini Ramchandra Salgar, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, Residing at : At & Post Pakami, Taluka North Solapur, District Solapur 413255.

¶9

… Defendants

¶10

Sanap ( OA No. 439/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶11

Appearances :- For Applicant Advocate R.B. Ganbote. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶12

Total Claim Amount – Rs.31,44,620/-

¶13

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 03^rd September, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.31,44,620/- together with future interest @11.70% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application dated 29.06.2016 of defendant Nos.1 and 2, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Housing loan facility of Rs.30,70,000/- to the defendants for construction of house vide Sanction Letter dated 25.07.2016.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendants have also executed deed of mortgage on 02.08.2016 in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 79/1B admeasuring 2H

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 439/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶19

40R at village Virvade Budruk, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur, in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendants have also executed Acknowledgment on 30.11.2018 and 20.11.2020 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan account.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 28.06.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶21

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 26.05.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶22

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Bala Kishore Swamy, Senior Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-12 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶23

Sanap ( OA No. 439/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

The applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets, therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶27

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.70% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶28

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

A} Original Application No. 439/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶31

B} Defendant Nos.1 and 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.31,44,620/(Rupees Thirty One Lakhs Forty Four Thousand Six

¶32

Sanap ( OA No. 439/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶33

Hundred Twenty only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 29.05.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶34

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 79/1B admeasuring 2H 40R at village Virvade Budruk, Taluka Mohol, District Solapur, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶35

D} The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶36

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶37

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

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 03.09.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 439/2023 ) 5 of 5

Uco Bank v. Ramchandra Nagnath Salgar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Ramchandra Nagnath Salgar

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

Bank of India versus Shivaji Bhandari

Canara Bank versus Yuvraj Devidas Salunkhe

Bank of India versus Vikram Kharat

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S. M P Enterprises and Associates Ltd.

Bank of India versus Sandip Madhukar Narkar

Bank of India versus Shraddha S. Dalvi