Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Snheal Enterprises Prop Mr. Nilesh Madan Angolkar

DRT11 Apr 2025OA/816/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by Bank of Maharashtra against a proprietary concern and its guarantor. The tribunal reduced the claimed amount by deducting penal interest and granted recovery of the reduced sum with future simple interest at 9% p.a., denying the specific claim for hypothecated assets due to lack of description.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly or severally to pay Rs.11,30,889/- with future interest @9% p.a. (simple) from 04.07.2019; Issue Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Snheal Enterprises Prop Mr. Nilesh… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 04.07.2019 Registered on: 04.10.2022 Decided on: 11.04.2025 Duration: Y M D 05 09 07

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.816/2022.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitions & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its Head Office at “Lokmangal” 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune-5 and Branch amongst other places at Shroli (P) Branch, Kolhapur, C.S.No.1173, Unchgaonkar Lane, Main Road, Shiroli Pulachi, Taluka Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur – 416 122.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Snehal Enterprises

¶8

A Sale Proprietary concern represented Through Proprietor – Mr. Nilesh Madan Angolkar Neharu Nagar, Near Isolation Hospital, Kolhapur -416 012.

¶9

2. Mr. Shreyash Satish Patil

¶10

Age 32 years, Occ.:- Business R/at – Gajlaxmi Apartment, Sane Guruji Vasahat, Kolhapur – 416 011.

¶11

… Defendants

¶12

APPEARANCES

¶13

For the Applicant For the Defendants

¶14

Advocate Mrs. Priti Bhat Ex-parte

¶15

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.11,48,790/-.

(OA No.816/2022)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 11^th April, 2025)

¶20

1 The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of aggregate sum of Rs.11,48,790/- towards Cash Credit Facility as on 08.05.2019 together with future interest thereon at the rate of @9% per annum with monthly rests till actual realization of the amount from the Defendants.

¶21

2 Brief facts of the application are as under:-

¶22

Defendant No.1 is a Proprietary concern represented through Proprietor Mr. Nilesh Madan Angolkar. Defendant No.1 has been sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs.10 lakhs on 25.04.2017 on the request of defendant No.1. Defendant No.2 stood guarantor in his personal capacity for repayment of the dues in respect of the credit facility granted to Defendant No.1. The credit facility granted to the defendant No.1 was considered under Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana. Defendants executed certain documents in favour of the Applicant Bank as set out in Para No.5.3 of the Original Application.

¶23

So also, the defendants have executed Deed of Hypothecation dated 26.04.2017 and thereby kept First and exclusive charge and security by way of hypothecation charge over the borrower’s present and future movables i.e. stock and receivables more particularly described in Deed of Hypothecation.

(OA No.816/2022)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

The defendants failed to perform their commitment to pay the dues and in spite of the repeated requests of the applicant bank, the defendants have not bothered to respond them and thereby committed willful and perennial defaults in repayments. Therefore, the applicant bank has classified the account of the defendants as NPA on 01.07.2018 in accordance with the direction and guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. But, the defendants did not bother about the repayment of the due amount.

¶28

Hence, this application is filed.

¶29

4 Defendants have failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against them vide Order dated 27.02.2025 passed below the Application (Exh.-01).

¶30

5 The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Mr. Manoj M.Patil, Manager & produced on record the Loan Transaction documents (Exh.7) at Exhibits.AW-1 to AW-8, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶31

6 I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Bank.

¶32

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

(OA No.816/2022)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

8 The applicant bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.17,901/- which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, total claim amount of Rs.11,48,790/- is reduced to Rs.11,30,889/- .

¶37

9 The Applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets, as mentioned in the Original Application. However, there is no detailed description with respect to hypothecated vehicle/assets. Therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated vehicle/ assets cannot be granted.

¶38

10 The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest at the contractual rate per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶39

11 Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(A) Original Application No.816/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶42

(B) Defendants No. 1 & 2 either jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.11,30,889/ - (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Thirty Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Nine only) towards Cash Credit Account No.60281046559 with future interest @9% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 04.07.2019 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

(OA No.816/2022)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

(D) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the Applicant Bank and the defendants.

¶48

Place : Pune Date: 11.04.2025

¶49

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶50

(OA No.816/2022)

¶51

Page 5 of 5

¶52

[ANIL]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Snheal Enterprises Prop Mr. Nilesh Madan Angolkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Snheal Enterprises Prop Mr. Nilesh Madan Angolkar

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

Federal Bank versus Aba

Amol Kashinath Gawade versus Union Bank of India

Mblem Digital versus Uco Bank

Federal Bank versus Mustafa Jamadar

Federal Bank versus Rangrao Patil

Union Bank of India versus Ms Meera Maternity and General Hospital Prop Dr. Monika Baban Thorat