Allowed

Phoenix Arc Private Limited v. Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.

DRT15 Jul 2025OA/671/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune allowed an Original Application by Phoenix ARC Private Limited for recovery of a sanctioned loan amount against Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. and guarantors. The court reduced the claim by deducting penal interest, set future interest at 9%, and granted a charge over mortgaged industrial land with permission to sell.</summary>

What did the court decide?

Amount reduced to Rs. 27,98,34,933/- with future interest at 9% p.a.; property secured; judgment for sale of mortgaged land.

Phoenix Arc Private Limited versus Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 01.09.2021 Registered on .. 07.05.2022 Decided on .. 15.07.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--10--14

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 671/2022.

¶3

Phoenix ARC Private Limited, (Trustee of Phoenix Trust FY 18-8), A company incorporated under Indian and as a Companies registered Securitisation and Asset Reconstruction Company under the Securitisation and Asset Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, having its registered office at Dani Corporate Park, 158, C.S.T. Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 098.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 M/s. Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd., A private limited company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at FR-4, 4^th Floor, Vasant Niwara Apartment, 250/4 B, Nagala Park, Near Mahaveer College, Kolhapur 416 002.

¶7

2 Mr. Amol Ramesh Patil, Age Adult, Occ. Business, R/at – 11, Omkar Bungalow, Ayodhya

¶8

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 1 of 7

¶9

Colony, Line Bazaar, Kasba-Bawda, Kolhapur 416 006.

¶10

3 Mrs. Asmita Amol Patil, Age Adult, Occ. Business, R/at – 11, Omkar Bungalow, Ayodhya Colony, Line Bazaar, Kasba-Bawda, Kolhapur 416 006.

¶11

4 Shripad Shivaji Randive, Age Adult, Occ. Business, R/at – 1557, E, Randive Galli, KasbaBawda, Kolhapur 416 006. … Defendants

¶12

:- Appearances

¶13

For Applicant Advocate S.S. Irani. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶14

Total Claim Amount – Rs.29,88,08,134/-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Delivered on 15^th July, 2025)

¶17

The Applicant has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.29,88,08,134/- together with future interest @13.50% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶19

Applicant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act pursuant to Section 3 of the Securitisation and Asset Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

¶20

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 2 of 7

¶21

The applicant is a Financial Institution as defined under Sub-section (h) of Section 2 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and hence is competent to file present Original Application. Assignor Bank vide deed of assignment dated 26.03.2018 has assigned the loan account in respect of financial facilities availed by the defendants, to the applicant together with all the rights, title and interest in the underlying security interests created in its favour therein and all the rights, title and interest of the Assignor Bank to initiate and continue legal proceedings against the defendants with respect to the said debts.

¶22

Defendant No.1 is a private limited company and represented by its Directors i.e. defendant Nos. 2 to 4. Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 are guarantors to the loan facilities availed by defendant No.1.

¶23

As per the loan application dated 29.05.2015 of the defendants No.1, the Assignor Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit facility of Rs.12,50,00,000/- and Term loan facility of Rs.47,00,000/- to the defendants vide Sanction Letter dated 23.06.2015. Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by defendant No.1.

¶24

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security

¶25

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 3 of 7

¶26

documents in favour of the Assignor Bank. The defendants have also executed deed of hypothecation in respect of vehicles etc. and deed of equitable mortgage dated 30.06.2015 in respect of all that piece and parcel of Industrial NA land admeasuring 94R i.e. 9400 sq. mtrs. along with Showroom construction thereon admeasuring 29,214 sq. fts. At Bhumapan Gat No. 192/2 at village Wathar Tarf, Vadgaon, Taluka Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur, in favour of the Assignor Bank.

¶27

The applicant Company contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 01.07.2016, the Assignor Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, on 19.09.2016, the Assignor Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the Assignor Bank. Therefore, Assignor Bank took possession of the mortgaged property and issued and served possession Notice dated 04.01.2017 to the defendants. Thereafter, Assignor Bank assigned all rights, title and interest in the financial facilities in favour

¶28

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 4 of 7

¶29

of the applicant Company vide Assignment Agreement dated 26.03.2018. Hence, this application is filed.

¶30

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 02.05.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶31

The applicant has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Mahesh Malujkar, Associate Vice President of the applicant Company, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-21 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 5 of 7

¶36

The applicant has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.1,89,73,201/- (Rs.1,85,21,108/- towards Cash Credit and Rs.4,52,093/- towards Term Loan) which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, total claim amount of Rs.29,88,08,134/- is reduced to Rs.27,98,34,933/-.

¶37

The applicant has claimed future interest @13.50% 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.

¶38

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶39

O R D E R

¶40

A} Original Application No. 671/2022 is allowed with proportionate costs.

¶41

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant the sum of Rs.27,98,34,933/- (Rupees Twenty Seven Crore Ninety Eight Lakhs Thirty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Three only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 01.09.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶42

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 6 of 7

¶43

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of Industrial NA land admeasuring 94R i.e. 9400 sq. mtrs. along with Showroom construction thereon admeasuring 29,214 sq. fts. At Bhumapan Gat No. 192/2 at village Wathar Tarf, Vadgaon, Taluka Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur, more particularly described in the Schedule B of Para No. 5.9 of the Original Application.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 15.07.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶47

Sanap ( OA No. 671/2022 ) 7 of 7

Phoenix Arc Private Limited v. Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phoenix Arc Private Limited v. Omkar Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.

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

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Creative Baron-Prop-Mr Akhtar Ali Khan

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Milind

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus L v Farms

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S. National Automobiles

Bank of Maharashtra versus Salim Rashid Tamboli, Prop. of Javed Kirana and General Store

Uco Bank versus Ujjawala Phadtare