Allowed

State Bank of India v. Jivan Uttam Chinchale

DRT4 Dec 2025OA/708/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of approximately Rs. 23.63 lakhs outstanding from borrowers. The court granted the principal amount with future interest at 9% per annum and directed the sale of mortgaged property to realize dues.

What did the court decide?

Borrowers to pay Rs. 23,63,301/- plus future interest at 9% per annum; Bank directed to sell mortgaged property and issue Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Jivan Uttam Chinchale — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 13.08.2024 Registered on: 10.09.2024 Decided on: 04.12.2025 Duration: Y M D 01 03 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 708/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 23,63,301/-

¶4

State Bank of India, A body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India, (SARB), Act, 1955 having a SME Branch, at Tuljapur, Through its Manager, Mr. Shivaji s/o Vitthalrao Daud (City Case Officer), Age: 43 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Aurangabad.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Jivan Uttam Chinchale Age: Major, Occ. Business, R/o. 11, At Post Javali, Tq. Ausa, Dist. Nanded 413516. AND Plot No. 2, Sr. No. 04/B, Near Farande Park, Wadi BK., Dist. Nanded 413516.

¶8

2. Daivashala Jivan Chinchale Age: 48 yrs., Occ. Business, R/o. Plot No. 5, Sr. No. 04/B, Near Farande Park, Wadi BK., Dist. Nanded 413516.

…Defendants

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 1 of 7

[AMBADAS]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant Mr. A.L. Muley Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Delivered on 04.11.2025

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 23,63,301/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Sixty Three Thousand, Three Hundred and One only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 13.08.2024, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

The applicant bank states that, the Defendant no. 1 and 2 had approached the Applicant Bank requesting sanction of Housing Loan Facility. After due consideration, the Bank sanctioned Housing Loan Facility of Rs. 26,60,000/- and funding of Home Loan Insurance cover of Rs. 60,000/- vide sanction Letter dated 18.12.2015, subject to certain terms and conditions. The agreed

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 2 of 7

[AMBADAS]

rate of interest for the said facility was @9.55% per annum with

¶24

monthly rests. Additionally, the Defendants agreed to pay further interest at the rate of 2% per annum by way of liquidated damages in the event of default in repayment.

¶25

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included arrangement letter, housing loan agreement, registered mortgage deed vide no. 7327/2015 dated 18.12.2015 etc., in favor of the applicant bank.

¶26

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered mortgage deed vide no. 7327/2015 dated 18.12.2015, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property –

¶27

All that piece and parcel of Survey No. 04/B, plot no. 02, Near Farande Park Wadi Bk. Dist. Nanded, Standing in the name of defendant Jivan Uttam Chinachale, which is bounded as under:

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 3 of 7

[AMBADAS]

East: Road, West: Land of Pawade, South: Plot No. 01, North: Plot No. 3.

¶32

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 24.09.2020. Therefore, on 20.07.2024 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 4 of 7

[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 30.04.2025.

¶37

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Sjivaji Vitthalrao Daud, City Case Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-6 as per list of documents Exh. 5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶38

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

¶39

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.

¶40

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

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 5 of 7

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9.55% with monthly rests from the date of filing i.e. 13.08.2024 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.

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(A) Original Application No. 708/2024 is allowed with

¶47

costs.

¶48

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 23,63,301/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs, Sixty Three Thousand, Three Hundred and One only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple), from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 13.08.2024 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.708/2024)

Page 6 of 7

[AMBADAS]

registered mortgage deed vide no. 7327/2015 dated 18.12.2015 at Exh. A-4 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶54

All that piece and parcel of Survey No. 04/B, plot no. 02, Near Farande Park Wadi Bk. Dist. Nanded, Standing in the name of defendant Jivan Uttam Chinachale, which is bounded as under: East: Road, West: Land of Pawade, South: Plot No. 01, North: Plot No. 3.

¶55

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties to recover its dues.

¶56

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶57

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

¶58

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.04.12.2025

¶61

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

¶62

(OA No.708/2024)

¶63

Page 7 of 7

¶64

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. Jivan Uttam Chinchale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Jivan Uttam Chinchale

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

Idbi Bank versus M/s Mansee Labour Suppliers

Canara Bank versus Shri. Shivaji Ramchandra Pawar

Ms Mauli Krushi Seva Kendra versus Bank of Maharashtra

Union Bank of India versus Anirudha Laxmanrao Khotkar

Union Bank of India versus Janardhan Laxmanrao Khotkar

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Krishna Laxmanrao Khotkar