Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Vilasrao Khanderao Shinde

DRT6 Oct 2025OA/687/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of an original application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues. Finding the evidence uncontradicted due to the absent defendants, the Tribunal allowed the application, ordered payment of the principal and court-approved future interest, and secured the debt via mortgaged agricultural lands.

What did the court decide?

The respondents shall jointly and severally pay Rs. 26,82,431/- along with future interest at 9% p.a. (simple) from 11.06.2024 until full realization.

Union Bank of India versus Vilasrao Khanderao Shinde — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 11.06.2024 Registered on: 28.08.2024 Decided on: 06.10.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 03 25

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 687/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 26,82,431/-

¶4

Union Bank of India,

¶5

(Erstwhile “Corporation Bank”) A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Registered office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Station Road, Dist. Ahmednagar and having it’s Asset Recovery Branch (ARB), at Plot No. 3, 1^st Floor, Sahakar Colony, Shahanoorwadi, Aurangabad, through its Power of Attorney, Mr. Abhaykumar Dattatray Baviskar, (Chief Manager), Age: 38 years, Occ.: Service, R/o. Plot No. 3, 1^st Floor, Sahakar Colony, Shahnoorwadi, Aurangabad 431005.

… Applicant

Versus

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 1 of 10

[AMBADAS]

1. Mr. Vilasrao Khanderao Shinde, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar 413703.

¶12

2. Mr. Rahul Prakashrao Shinde, Age: Major, Occu.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar 413703.

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

Mr. K. D. Pande -Advocate Ex-parte

¶16

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Delivered on 06.10.2025

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶20

recovery of a sum of Rs. 26,82,431/- ( Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Eighty Two Thousand, Four Hundred and Thirty One only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 11.06.2024, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶21

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Crop loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Crop loan facility of Rs. 14,16,000/vide sanction letter dated 12.03.2014 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @10.85% p.a. with half yearly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶26

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant No. 1 executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, letter of undertaking, hypothecation agreement, demand promissory note, registered mortgage deed bearing day book no. 1478 dated 20.03.2014 etc., in favour of the applicant bank. Additionally defendant No. 2

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

stood as guarantor for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of

¶31

guarantee dated 20.03.2014 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶32

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant created first charge over their immovable property under registered mortgage deed bearing day book no. 1478 dated 20.03.2014 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶33

i) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 9 H 21 R, to the extent of land admeasuring 0 H 88 R out of Gut No. 520, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East: Road, West: Stream, South: Gut No. 552 North: Gut No. 519.

¶34

ii) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 14 H 93 R, to the extent of land admeasuring 4 H 00 R out of Gut No. 460/1, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East: Steam, West: Road, South: Gut No. 459, North: Gut No. 462, 460.

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

iii) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 13 H 77 R, to the extent of land admeasuring 1 H 00 R out of Gut No. 519, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East: Road, West: Stream, South: Gut No. 520 North: Gut No. 516.

¶39

iv) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 0 H 96 R, to the extent of land admeasuring 0 H 19 R out of Gut No. 316, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East: Road, West: Gut No. 326, South: Gut No. 317, North: Gut No. 315.

¶40

v) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 7 H 38 R, to the extent of land admeasuring 1 H 00 R out of Gut No. 140/1, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East: Road, West: Gut No. 520, South: Road, North: Gut No. 519.

¶41

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard

¶42

to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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 31.03.2021. Therefore, on 22.02.2024 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.

¶47

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 06.03.2025.

¶48

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Abhaykumar Dattatray Baviskar, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-18 along with list of

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶53

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

¶54

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.

¶55

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

¶56

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.50 p. a. on term loan from the date of filing i.e. 11.06.2024 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.

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 687/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶62

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 26,82,431/- ( Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Eighty Two Thousand, Four Hundred and Thirty One only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 11.06.2024 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶63

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties. Vide simple mortgage deed bearing daybook no. 1478 dated 20.03.2014 at Exh. A-9 in the list of documents Exh. 5.

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

North: Gut No. 519.

v) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land totally admeasuring 7 H 38 R, to the extent of land admeasuring

(OA No.687/2024)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

1 H 00 R out of Gut No. 140/1, situated at Village Ranjangaon, Tq. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under:

¶77

East: Road, West: Gut No. 520, South: Road, North: Gut No. 519.

¶78

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

¶79

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶80

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

¶81

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶82

Sd/-

¶83

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.06.10.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶84

(OA No.687/2024)

¶85

Page 10 of 10

¶86

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Vilasrao Khanderao Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Vilasrao Khanderao 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Omkar Agency

Pramod Manikrao Joshi versus the Pandharpur Urban Co. Op. Bank Ltd. Pandharpur

Union Bank of India versus Rahul Abasaheb Jambhalkar

Union Bank of India versus Ganesh Sahebrao Ubale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shaikh Rashid Shaikh Gani

Bank of Baroda versus Prakash Pralhad Salve