Allowed

Union Bank of India ( Corporation Bank )) v. Jayant Gangadhar Shinde

DRT20 Sept 2025OA/45/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dr. J. R. Chauhan allowed Union Bank of India's debt recovery application against the Shinde defendants. The tribunal directed repayment of the principal sum plus 9% simple annual interest, secured by specific mortgaged immovable properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 23,83,391.30 plus 9% p.a. simple interest; direction to sell mortgaged properties; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India ( Corporation Bank )) versus… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 04.01.2025 Registered on: 21.01.2025 Decided on: 20.09.2025 Duration: Y M D 00 09 16

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 45/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 23,83,391.30/UNION BANK OF INDIA, (erstwhile Corporation

¶4

Bank, a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Registered Office

¶5

at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-40021 and having branches amongst other places at Main Branch, Jalgaon, through its Authorized Officer, Mr. Jitin Jain (Chief Manager), Age: 47 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. … Applicant

Versus

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 1 of 10

[AMBADAS]

1. Mr. Jayant Gangadhar Shinde, Age: Major, Occu.: Agriculture, R/o.: At 220, Shanipeth, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 425001.

¶11

2. Mr. Sandhyabai Gangadhar Shinde, Age: Major, Occu.: Agriculture, R/o.: At 220, Shanipeth, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 425001.

¶12

3. Mr. Vikramsingh Mangalsingh Shinde, Age: Major, Occu.: Agriculture, R/o.: At 220, Shanipeth, Jalgaon, …Defendants Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 425001.

¶13

APPEARANCES

¶14

For the Applicant Mr. K. D. Pande - Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Delivered on 20.09.2025

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶18

recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,83,391.30/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Eighty Three Thousand, Three Hundred Ninety One and Thirty Paisa only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

Original Application, i.e., 04.01.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶23

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶24

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for a Term Loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan facility of Rs. 4,30,000/- vide sanction letter dated 05.03.2012 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facility was @ 11.60% p.a. with yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @ 2% by way of liquidated

¶25

damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶26

Thereafter the defendants again approached the applicant bank and requested to sanction another term loan facility and upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan facility of Rs. 2,50,000/-

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

vide sanction letter dated 06.06.2012 on certain terms and

¶31

conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facility was @ 11.60% p.a. with yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @ 2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶32

The applicant bank further states that the defendants again approached the applicant bank and requested to sanction another Crop loan facility and upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Crop Loan facility of Rs. 1,50,000/- vide sanction letter dated 30.07.2012 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facility was @ 10.50% p.a. with yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @ 2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendant No. 1 & 2 executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, letters of undertaking, deeds of hypothecation, demand promissory notes, simple mortgage deed bearing day book No. 1525 dated 20.03.2012 etc. Additionally Defendant No. 3 stood as guarantor for Defendant No. 1 & 2 and executed a deeds of guarantee on 05.06.2012, 06.06.2012 & 30.07.2012 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶37

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property under daybook no. 1525 dated 20.03.2012 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶38

i) All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 47 admeasuring 168 sq. mtrs. out of Gut No. 89, situated at Village Kusumbe Kh., Tq.& Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under East: Plot No. 46, West: Road, South: Road, North: Plot No. 48.

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

ii) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 1 H, 26 R, P.K. O H 23 R total area 1 H 49 R out of Gut No. 256/1, situated at Village Pathrad, Bk. Shiwar, Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under East: Gut No. 252, 254 & 255 West: Gut No. 258 & 257 South: Shiv of Palhrad Kh. North: Plot No. 257.

¶43

The applicant bank further states that the defendant No. 1 & 2 also executed hypothecation agreement, thereby hypothecating crops including standing crops i.e. sugarcane, pomegranate, etc., in favour of the applicant bank

¶44

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 29.03.2023. Therefore, on

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

09.12.2024 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendant through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendant failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶49

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through paper publication. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 01.09.2025.

¶50

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Jitin Jain, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1to A-57 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶51

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

¶52

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

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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

¶57

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable properties of the borrower which are mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶58

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 12.50% p.a. on aforesaid loans from the date of filing i.e. 04.01.2025 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 @ 9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶59

ORDER

¶60

(A) Original Application No. 45/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶61

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 23,83,391.30/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Eighty Three Thousand, Three Hundred Ninety One and Thirty Paisa only), along with

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.01.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶66

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties bearing daybook no. 1525 vide mortgage deed dated 20.03.2012 at Exh A-24 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶67

i) All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 47 admeasuring 168 sq. mtrs. out of Gut No. 89, situated at Village Kusumbe Kh., Tq.& Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under

¶68

East: Plot No. 46, West: Road, South: Road, North: Plot No. 48.

¶69

¶70

East: Gut No. 252, 254 & 255 West: Gut No. 258 & 257 South: Shiv of Palhrad Kh. North: Plot No. 257.

(OA No.45/2025)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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

¶75

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶76

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

¶77

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶78

Sd/Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.20.09.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶79

(OA No.45/2025)

¶80

Page 10 of 10

¶81

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India ( Corporation Bank )) v. Jayant Gangadhar Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India ( Corporation Bank )) v. Jayant Gangadhar Shinde

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s Monarch Geotex

State Bank of India versus M/S Haji Shakoor Ayub Saya

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vijay Shivaji vadak

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus Bhimashankar Gurunathappa Bawage

Idbi Bank versus Anjali Sanjay Kulkarni

Canara Bank versus Sahadev Vishwanath Nimbhore