Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sonal Umesh Patil

DRT10 Jul 2025OA/725/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India against Sonal Umesh Patil and Umesh Devidas Patil. The bank claimed recovery of Rs. 21,23,364.70 with future interest on a term loan where the defendants, including a guarantor, failed to repay despite service of.notice. As defendants appeared absent, the court relied on bank evidence and awarded recovery with future interest at 9% p.a., securing the debt against mortgaged and hypothecated properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants ordered to pay Rs. 21,23,364.70 with future interest at 9% p.a. from 29.08.2024, secured by hypothecation and mortgage of assets. Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus Sonal Umesh Patil — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 29.08.2024 Registered on: 29.08.2024 Decided on: 10.07.2025 Duration: Y M D - 11 11

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Shri Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding officer)

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.21,23,364.70 PS.

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.725/2024

¶5

Union Bank of India ,

¶6

a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of undertakings) Act, 1970 having it's Registered Office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Main Branch, Dhule … Applicant through it’s Authorized Person Mr. Bhatusing Shamsing Thakur (Branch Manager), Age: 40 years, Occu: Service R/o. Main Branch, Dhule

¶7

Versus

¶8

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 1 of 8

¶9

Sonal Umesh Patil Age: Major, Occu: Agri, R/o: At Post Mondhale, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶10

AND / OR

¶11

Umesh Devidas Patil Age: Major, Occu: Agri, R/o: At Post Mondhale, Tq. Parola, Dist. Jalgaon

¶12

… Defendants

¶13

APPEARANCES

¶14

For the Applicant Mr. K. D. Pande - Advocate For Defendants Exparte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

(Delivered on 10^th July, 2025)

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.21,23,364.70 PS (Rs. Twenty One Lacs Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Four & Seventy Ps Only) together with interest 09.90% per annum with half yearly rests upon term loan from 01.07.2024 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶19

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 2 of 8

¶20

That, the Defendant No. 1 had approached to the Applicant Bank and requested to sanction a Term loan facility. Upon considering the representation, requests and need of the defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term loan of Rs. 19,60,000/- vide sanction letter dated 07.12.2021 on certain terms & conditions. The defendant no.2 stood as guarantor. The agreed rate of interest was @ 9.90 % per annum with half yearly rests. The defendant also agreed to pay an additional interest by way of liquidated damages @ 2% p.a. in case of default in repayment.

¶21

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants executed loan documents in favour of the applicant bank namely loan application dated 06.12.2021, letter of sanction dated 07.12.2021, letter of continuity dated 07.12.2021, demand promissory note for Rs.19,60,000/dated 07.12.2021, interest agreement dated 07.12.2021, hypothecation agreement dated 07.12.2021, registered simple mortgage deed dated 29.10.2021, deed of guarantee dated 30.07.2021 vide list of documents Exh.5.

¶22

The applicant bank contended that to secure the term loan facility, the defendants have mortgaged their immovable

¶23

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 3 of 8

¶24

property and created charge and security interest by executing registered simple mortgage deed bearing daybook no.4242 dated 29.10.2021 in favour of the applicant bank in respect of following property.

¶25

All that piece & parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 81 R out of gut no.101/1/A/2/1/2 situated at Hiwarkhede Khurd Tq. Parola Dist. Jalgaon which is bounded as under. East - Gut no.103 & 118.

¶26

West – Gut no.100 & 99 b

¶27

South- gut no.108

¶28

North- gut mo.103, 104 & Nala.

¶29

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promises and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly within a year 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

¶30

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 4 of 8

¶31

and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendants became irregular and classified as nonperforming asset on 24.02.2024. Therefore, on 30.07.2024, the applicant Bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their Advocate. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶32

The defendants failed to appear in the matter though they served with service of summons, hence the defendants proceeded exparte as per Order dated 20.03.2025.

¶33

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Evidence (Exhibit-4) of Bhatusingh s/o. Shamsing Thakur Authorized Person of the applicant Bank and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-13, along with list of documents Exh. 5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶34

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

¶35

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted

¶36

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 5 of 8

¶37

evidence of the applicant bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶38

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 9.90% per annum with half yearly rests from 01.07.2024 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the defendants. However, considering the facts and circumstances 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.

¶39

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(A) Original Application No.725/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶42

(B) Defendants are ordered and directed to pay jointly and severally to the applicant the aggregate sum of Rs.21,23,364.70 PS (Rs. Twenty One Lacs Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Four & Seventy Ps Only) alongwith future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from 29.08.2024 till full payment/realization of the amount.

¶43

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 6 of 8

¶44

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the Hypothecation of movable properties vide Hypothecation-cum-Loan Agreement Exh. A-7 dated 07.12.2021 as per list of documents Exh.5.

¶45

(D) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable propertiesAll that piece & parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 81 R out of gut no.101/1/A/2/1/2 situated at Hiwarkhede Khurd Tq. Parola Dist. Jalgaon which is bounded as under. East - Gut no.103 & 118.

¶46

West – Gut no.100 & 99 b

¶47

South- gut no.108

¶48

North- gut mo.103, 104 & Nala.

¶49

(E) The applicant bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and hypothecated articles/goods to recover its dues.

¶50

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶51

(G) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the

¶52

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 7 of 8

¶53

applicant and defendants.

¶54

(H) File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

¶55

Place : Aurangabad. Date : 10.07.2025.

¶56

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

¶57

[DAK] (OA No.725/2024) Page 8 of 8

Union Bank of India v. Sonal Umesh Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sonal Umesh Patil

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

Subhash Zumbarlal Bhogawat versus Nagar Urban Co. Operative Bank

Karuna Vinod Lahoti versus Aavas Financiers Limited

Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. versus Ms Gunai Shikshan Prasarak Mandal

Union Bank of India ( Andhra Bank ) versus Mosin Munir Shaikh

Sunil Jagannath Dusing versus Bajaj Finance Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Avinash Ramkisan Vidhate