Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suresh Katkar

DRT18 Aug 2025OA/45/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of dues from borrowers and guarantors. The court reduced the claim by deducting unjustified penal interest, adjusted the future interest rate to 9%, and granted recovery of the principal along with secured mortgage relief.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay reduced principal sums of Rs.25,18,019 and Rs.7,62,108 respectively with future interest at 9% and 7%/9%, secured by mortgage, with right to sell property and issue recovery certific

Bank of Maharashtra versus Suresh Katkar — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 05.04.2022 Registered on .. 19.01.2023 Decided on .. 18.08.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--04--13

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 45/2023.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra,

¶4

A Body Corporate established under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its registered office at ―Lokmangal‖, 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411 005 and one of its branch office at Sansar, Indapur – 413 104.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 Mr. Suresh Pandurang Katkar, Residing at – A/P Sansar, Taluka Indapur, District Pune 413 104.

¶8

2 Mrs. Madhuri Suresh Katkar, Residing at – A/P Sansar, Taluka Indapur, District Pune 413 103.

¶9

3 Mr. Hanumant Bapurao Bhoite, Residing at – 231, Sansar Bhoite Vasti, Taluka Indapur, District Pune 413 104

¶10

4 Mr. Ganesh Mahadev Rayate, Residing at- 106, Rayate Mala, Sansar, Taluka Indapur, District Pune 413 104

¶11

… Defendants

¶12

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 1 of 7

¶13

:- Appearances For Applicant Advocate Sheetal Deole For Defendants Ex parte.

¶14

Total Claim Amount – Rs.33,05,538/-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Delivered on 18^th August, 2025)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.33,05,538/- together with future interest @12.50 per annum for Term Loan account and @7% per annum up to Rs.3,00,000/- and above Rs.3,00,000/- @10.25% per annum for MKCC account loan from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶19

As per the loan application of defendant Nos.1 and 2, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term loan facility of Rs.12,00,000/- to defendant Nos.1 and 2 for the purpose of motor pipeline vide Sanction Letter dated 02.04.2011. Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by defendant Nos. 1 and 2.

¶20

Thereafter, again as per the loan application of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned the MKCC loan facility of Rs.5,00,000/- to defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 10.10.2013. Defendant Nos. 3

¶21

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 2 of 7

¶22

and 4 stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by defendant No. 1.

¶23

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have also executed deed of mortgage dated 29.03.2011 in respect of land bearing Gat Nos. 444 situated at village Shindewadi and Gat No. 344 situated at village Sansar Taluka Baramati, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendants have also executed Balance Confirmation Letter on 10.03.2020 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan account.

¶24

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 17.01.2022, the applicant Bank issued Recall Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶25

Hence, this application is filed.

¶26

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte

¶27

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 3 of 7

¶28

against the defendants as per Order dated 01.04.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶29

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Pankaj Kumar Shrivastva, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-23 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

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.

¶33

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.518/- for the Term Loan account, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the Term loan claim amount. Therefore, the claim

¶34

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 4 of 7

¶35

amount in respect of Term Loan of Rs.25,18,537/- is reduced to Rs.25,18,019/-.

¶36

Further, the applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.24,892/- for the MKCC Loan account, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the MKCC loan claim amount. Therefore, the claim amount in respect of MKCC of Rs.7,87,000/- is reduced to Rs.7,62,108/-.

¶37

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.50 per annum for Term Loan account and @7% per annum up to Rs.3,00,000/- and above Rs.3,00,000/- @10.25% per annum for MKCC account. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) for Term Loan account and @7% per annum (simple) up to Rs.3,00,000/and above Rs.3,00,000/- @9% per annum for MKCC account, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶38

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶39

O R D E R

¶40

A} Original Application No. 45/2023 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶41

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.25,18,019/- (Rupees

¶42

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 5 of 7

¶43

Twenty Five Lakhs Eighteen Thousand Nineteen only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.04.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶44

C} Defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.7,62,108/(Rupees Seven Lakhs Sixty Two Thousand One Hundred Eight only) along with future interest @7% per annum up to Rs.3,00,000/- and above Rs.3,00,000/@9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.04.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶45

D} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage of land bearing Gat Nos. 444 situated at village Shindewadi and Gat No. 344 situated at village Sansar Taluka Baramati, District Pune, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.10 and 5.19 of the Original Application.

¶46

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

¶47

F} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶48

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 6 of 7

¶49

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

¶50

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 18.08.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶51

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2023 ) 7 of 7

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suresh Katkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suresh Katkar

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

Central Bank of India versus Sanjay Lokhande

Bank of India versus Sambhaji Patil

State Bank of India versus Ashitosh Gaikwad

State Bank of India versus Satish Nikam

Idbi Bank versus Mahesh

Uco Bank versus Ganesh Nagave