Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Amol Shete

DRT12 Dec 2025OA/50/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of Rs. 28.65 lakhs. The defendant, who defaulted on a secured loan, failed to appear. The court awarded the principal amount plus future interest at 9% per annum and empowered the bank to enforce the mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,65,473/- with future interest at 9% per annum; power to sell mortgaged property; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Amol Shete — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 11.05.2022 Registered on .. 19.01.2023 Decided on .. 12.12.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--07--01

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 50/2023.

¶3

Union Bank of India, A Banking Company constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Central office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 and Branch Office at – Shriyash Building, Near Civil Court, Bhigwan Road, Baramati, Taluka Baramati, District Pune.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Shri Amol Devidas Shete, Age Adult, Occ. Business, Residing at – 819, Saraf Chowk, Rashin, Taluka Karjat, District Ahmednagar 414 403

¶7

… Defendant

¶8

Appearances :-

¶9

For Applicant For Defendant

¶10

Advocate R.B. Ganbote. Ex parte.

¶11

Sanap ( OA No. 50/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶12

Total Claim Amount – Rs.28,65,473/-

¶13

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 12^th December, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.28,65,473/- together with future interest @14.75% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the mortgage loan facility of Rs.25,00,000/- to the defendant for his personal needs on 24.04.2015.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendant has also executed registered deed of simple mortgage dated 28.04.2015 in respect of all that piece and parcel of Grampanchayat Milkat No. 367 admeasuring 5000 square feet i.e. 464.68 square meters along with building constructed thereon admeasuring 2000 square feet and open space at village Rashin Gaothan, Taluka Karjat, District Ahmednagar, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 50/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶19

The defendant has also executed Balance Confirmation Letters dated 19.04.2018 and 20.05.2018 in favour of the applicant Bank and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan account.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as NonPerforming Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 16.10.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶21

Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 28.05.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Vinod Narayan Godse, Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 50/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶25

documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-13 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶26

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

¶27

Since the defendant 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.

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @14.75% 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.

¶29

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A} Original Application No. 50/2023 is allowed with costs. B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.28,65,473/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Three only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 11.05.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned

¶32

Sanap ( OA No. 50/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶33

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 Grampanchayat Milkat No. 367 admeasuring 5000 square feet i.e. 464.68 square meters along with building constructed thereon admeasuring 2000 square feet and open space at village Rashin Gaothan, Taluka Karjat, District Ahmednagar, 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 defendant.

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 12.12.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 50/2023 ) 5 of 5

Union Bank of India v. Amol Shete

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Amol Shete

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 Subhash Teravade

State Bank of India versus Mitul Vyas

Punjab National Bank versus Manoj Kad

State Bank of India versus Maksood

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Annasaheb Ashok Kajale Prop M/S Shri Ram Glass

Canara Bank versus Dattatraya Dukare