Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Bramhi Print and Pack

DRT24 Nov 2025OA/50/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of Rs. 1.19 crore principal along with future interest from M/s. Brahmi Print and Pack and individual borrowers, securing the claim over hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 1,19,96,583.33 with future interest at 8% per annum. Right to sell hypothecated assets and issue Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Bramhi Print and Pack — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 08.02.2023 Registered on: 05.02.2024 Decided on: 24.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 02 09 16

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 50/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 1,19,96,583.33/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970, Having its Head Office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411 005 and branches amongst the other places at Sawarkar Chowk, Aurangabad through its Authorized Person, Mr. Ashwin Baba Ganvir (Senior Manager), Age: 32 yrs., Occu: Service, R/o. Sawarkar Chowk, Aurangabad.

¶6

Versus

¶7

… Applicant

¶8

M/s. Brahmi Print and Pack R/o.: At Plot No. 45 C, Service Industry, Town Centre, Opp. Ambika Paper, CIDCO, Aurangabad 431001.

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 1 of 10

[AMBADAS]

2. Mrs. Vandana Vishal Khare, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: Plot No. 2, Ganesh Housing Society, Bajrang Chowk, Opp. Bharat Gas, N-8, CIDCO, Aurangabad 431001. AND/OR Mrs. Vandana Vishal Khare, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: Row House No. 5, Type D-07, “Sara Swapnangan”, Gut No. 93 & 95, Near Maruti Mandir, Village Gangapur Jahangir, Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad 431007.

¶13

3. Mrs. Shruti Chandrashekhar Sanghal, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: Row House No. 76, Kasliwal Purva, Near Endoworld Hospital, Chikalthana, Aurangabad 431001. AND/OR Mrs. Shruti Chandrashekhar Sanghal, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: “Sammed Niwas”, Samadhan Colony, Parbhani 431401.

¶14

…Defendants

¶15

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

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

JUDGMENT Delivered on 24.11.2025

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶21

recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,19,96,583.33/- (Rupees One Crore, Nineteen Lacs, Ninety Six Thousand, Five Hundred Eighty Three and Thirty Three only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 08.02.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶23

The applicant bank states that, defendant No. 2 & 3 being proprietor of Defendant No. 1 approached the applicant bank seeking financial assistance in the form of Term loan facility. Upon scrutiny of the submitted documents, the applicant bank sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 29.01.2018. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @9.95% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendants

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

also agreed to pay an additional interest @ 2% by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶28

That, the defendant thereafter applied to the applicant bank for a working capital term loan (WCTL) facility and upon considering the request and need of the defendants, the applicant bank was pleased to sanction a working capital term loan (WCTL) facility of Rs. 17,62,000/- to the defendants under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) vide sanction letter dated 18.06.2020. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @7.50% 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.

¶29

That, thereafter the defendant no. 2 and 3 on behalf of defendant no. 1 had applied to the applicant bank for a Funded Interest Loan Facility (FITL) and upon considering the request and need of the

¶30

defendants, the applicant bank was pleased to sanction Funded

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

Interest Loan Facility (FITL) of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the defendants under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) vide sanction letter dated 30.06.2021.

¶35

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, deeds of hypothecation, demand promissory notes, letter of proprietorship, etc., in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶36

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the loan facilities sanctioned, the Defendants executed deeds of Hypothecation, thereby hypothecating present and future movables, plants and machineries, goods, raw materials, items, inventories, stocks in process, semi-finished and finished goods, stores and spares (consumables), stock in trade, goods in process, movables in transit, assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademarks, copyrights, patents, tangible and intangible assets, contracts and

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

agreements, outstanding monies, claims bills, receivable, book debs (due or to become due), and all rights, titles, and interest of the borrower.

¶41

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 16.07.2022. Therefore, on 17.12.2022 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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 03.10.2025.

¶46

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Ashwin Baba Ganvir, Senior Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-19 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶47

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

¶48

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶49

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over hypothecated properties of the borrowers.

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 10.90% p.a., @7.50% p.a. & @ 8.20% p.a. respectively on the loans from the date of filing i.e. 08.02.2023 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 @ 8% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶54

ORDER

¶55

(A) Original Application No. 50/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶56

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 1,19,96,583.33/- (Rupees One Crore, Nineteen Lacs, Ninety Six Thousand, Five Hundred Eighty Three and Thirty Three only), along with future interest @ 8% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 08.02.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the present and future movables, plants and machineries, goods, raw materials, items, inventories, stocks in process, semi-finished and finished goods, stores and spares (consumables), stock in trade, goods in process, movables in transit, assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademarks, copyrights, patents, tangible and intangible assets, contracts and agreements, outstanding monies, claims bills, receivable, book debs (due or to become due), and all rights, titles, and interest of the borrower. Vide hypothecation agreements dated 20.06.2020 & 30.06.2021 at Exh. A-7, Exh. A-12 and A-13 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶61

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the above hypothecated plant and machineries /articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶62

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

(OA No.50/2024)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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

¶67

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶68

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

¶69

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:. 24.11.2025

¶70

(OA No.50/2024)

¶71

Page 10 of 10

¶72

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Bramhi Print and Pack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/S Bramhi Print and Pack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus M/S Vatsala Electricals

Icici Bank Limited versus Krishna Kailash Gawande

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus Vishal Shaligram Dabhade

Icici Bank Limited versus Ganesh S/o Dhondiram Maujal

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Raj Distributor

Union Bank of India versus M/S Adityashree Construction