Allowed

Uco Bank v. Shankar Veer

DRT30 May 2025OA/810/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery. The court held the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the principal sum with future interest at 9% p.a., recognized the secured mortgage, and directed the issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 60,44,364/- with future interest at 9% p.a., recognition of mortgage rights, and issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

Uco Bank versus Shankar Veer — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 26.12.2019 Registered on: 21.07.2022 Decided on: 30.05.2025 Duration: Y M D 5 5 4

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.810/2022

¶3

UCO Bank

¶4

A Corporate Body constituted under The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970 having it’s Head Office at 10, B, T.M. Sarani, Kolkata and Branch amongst other places at Market Yard, Indapur Road, Baramati, TalukaBaramati, District - Pune

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Shankar Dnyandeo Veer Adult, Occ: Agriculturist R/at – At & Post – Kazad, TalukaIndapur, District – Pune 413 114.

¶8

Mr. Dnyandeo Nivrutti Veer Adult, Occ: Agriculturist R/at – At & Post – Kazad, TalukaIndapur, District – Pune 413 114.

¶9

Mr. Pandurang Dnyandeo Veer Adult, Occ: Agriculturist R/at – At & Post – Kazad, TalukaIndapur, District – Pune 413 114.

…Defendants

(OA No.810/2022)

Page 1 of 6

[KAUR]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant	Mr. Ramesh B.	Ganbote - Advocate
For Defendants	None(Exparte	)

¶16

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.60,44,364/-

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

(Delivered on 30^th May, 2025)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.60,44,364/- together with future interest thereon @14.20% per annum with monthly rests from 26^th December, 2019 till repayment/realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

Defendant No.1 as principal borrower and defendant Nos.2 and 3 as guarantors approached the applicant Bank for seeking financial assistance in the form of Kisan Cash Credit and Term Loans. As per the loan applications of defendants, applicant Bank on 11^th December, 2014 sanctioned and disbursed the following loan/credit facilities:

¶22

Name of the facility	Amount	Purpose
Kisan Cash Credit	Rs.9,21,000/-
Term Loan – I	Rs.11,90,000/-	For Land
		Development
Term Loan-II	Rs.7,39,500/-	For PackingShed
Term Loan-III	Rs.8,24,500/-	For Plantation

(OA No.810/2022)

Page 2 of 6

[KAUR]

Term Loan-IV Rs.9,64,750/For Irrigation

¶27

Thus, applicant bank sanctioned the aggregate sum of Rs.46,39,750/- to the defendants.

¶28

The defendants accepted the terms of sanction and executed necessary loan transaction and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank as set out in the Original Application. Further to secure the aggregate amount of Rs.46,39,750/- defendant No.1 executed Simple Mortgage Deed dated 13^th December, 2014 duly registered with Sub Registrar Office Baramati at Serial No.10654/2014 in respect of immovable property in favour of the applicant Bank as set out in Paragraph No.5.6 of the Original Application.

¶29

It is contended by the applicant Bank that defendant No.1 agreed to repay the Term Loan of Rs.11,90,000/- by seven yearly installments of Rs.2,54,171/- commencing from 01.12.2016, the Term Loan of Rs.7,39,500/- by seven yearly installments of Rs.1,57,950/- commencing from 01.12.2016, the Term Loan of Rs.8,24,500/- by seven yearly installments of Rs.1,76,104/- commencing from 01.12.2016 and Term Loan of Rs.9,64,750/- by seven yearly installments of Rs.2,06,060/commencing from 01.12.2016

¶30

It is contended by the applicant Bank that on 30.09.2017

(OA No.810/2022)

Page 3 of 6

[KAUR]

defendant No.1 executed six separate Acknowledgements and confirmed balance in KCC and all five Term Loan Accounts.

¶35

It is further contended that after availing and utilizing the credit facilities, defendants failed to repay the loan amounts as per terms of sanction. Consequently, the accounts were classified as Non-Performing Assets. Hence, the applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of its dues.

¶36

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex parte against them vide Order dated 12^th February, 2025 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

¶37

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Lokesh Kumar, Branch Manager which supports the case of the applicant elucidated in the application.

¶38

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original loan transaction and security documents at Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW1/12 which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶39

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

¶40

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the

(OA No.810/2022)

Page 4 of 6

[KAUR]

application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶45

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @14.20% per annum with monthly rests. However, considering the facts of the present 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.

¶46

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(A) Original Application No.810/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶49

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the aggregate sum of Rs.60,44,364/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Forty-Four Thousand Three Hundred Sixty-Four only) with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26^th December, 2019 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.810/2022)

Page 5 of 6

[KAUR]

property i.e. All that piece and parcel of Gat No.98/1(P) admeasuring 01 Hector 76 Aar at Village Kazad, Taluka - Indapur within limits of Kazad Grampanchayat and also within the limits of Registration District Pune, Sub Registration District Baramati, District Pune more particularly described in paragraph No.5.6 of the Original Application.

¶55

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

¶56

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶57

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

¶58

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date: 30.05.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶59

(OA No.810/2022)

¶60

Page 6 of 6

¶61

[KAUR]

Uco Bank v. Shankar Veer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Shankar Veer

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr Kirtikumar Kanhyalal Devi Prop Yash Metals

Bank of Baroda versus Anil Balvram Yadhav

Idbi Bank versus Rupali

Federal Bank versus Rajkumar Kagwade

Federal Bank versus Shankar

Idbi Bank versus Ghanshyam