Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Jatin Jaysingh Padaya

DRT22 Jul 2025OA/83/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application by Central Bank of India to recover principal and interest from defendants who failed to repay a housing loan. The court enforced the mortgage security and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate after the defendants appeared ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of ₹33,13,283/- plus interest, enforcement of mortgage on specific flats, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Central Bank of India versus Jatin Jaysingh Padaya — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2025)

¶1

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶2

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶3

PRESIDING OFFICER: HARISH KUMAR KAUSHIK

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶5

Date of Institution: 17.09.2019 Date of Decision: 22.07.2025

¶6

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT :

¶7

₹ 33,13,283/-

¶8

Central Bank of India, A body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at Chandramukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 and a Branch Office amongst others at Seepz Branch, M.I.D.C., Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 096 Authorised signatory, Mr. Abhishek Kumar Sinha, Branch Manager. … Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Mr. Jatin Jaysingh Padaya 14/25, BIT Tatwadi, St. Mary Road, Mazgaon, Mumbai – 400 010.

¶11

Mr. Sitaram B. Sen 1125, CEN No. 23(22), Saba Nagar, Prem Nagar, Opp. Daulat Khal Chawl, Irla Tank, S.V.Road, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai – 400 056. …Defendants

¶12

Page 1 of 8

¶13

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶14

APPEARANCES For the Applicant : Mr Meghnath Navlani and Ms –

¶15

Rashmi Kamkhedkar Advocate

¶16

For Defendants : None – Advocate

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

(1) This is an application under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of the Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 renamed as Recovery of the Debt and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (for short, ‘the 1993 Act’) to recover ₹33,13,283/- as on 08.08.2019 alongwith further interest @ 9.60% per annum from the date of presentation of the Original Application i.e. 17.09.2019 till payment/realization and to enforce the mortgaged security.

¶19

The details of the Claim Amount is as follows:-

¶20

Outstanding Balance as	Unapplied Interest	Penal Interest	Other Expense	Total
per ledger	from	from
(as on	29.10.2018	29.10.2018
29.10.2018)	to	to
	08.08.2019	08.08.2019
₹28,95,984/-	₹3,83,437/-	₹3,862/-	₹ 30,000/-	₹ 33,13,283/ -

¶21

(2) It is undisputed fact in the matter that the Defendant nos. 1 and 2 were duly served with the

¶22

Page 2 of 8

¶23

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶24

summons vide order-sheet dated 15.10.2024. Despite service, the defendants did not enter their appearance nor filed any written statement and therefore, they are set ex-parte on 27.06.2025. (3) Defendant no. 1 is the borrower who approached the Applicant Bank seeking financial assistance by way of Housing Loan and Defendant no. 2 stood as a guarantor. Pursuant to the loan application dated 05.08.2015 made by defendant for the purpose of purchasing residential flat at Dapoli for personal use, the Applicant sanctioned the loan vide Sanction letter dated 06.10.2015 for sum of ₹31,00,000/- payable in 240 EMIs of ₹29,813/- which includes principal and interest @ 9.95% per annum floating rate with moratorium period of 2 months. The loan was sanctioned under Cent Home Scheme.

¶25

The details of the amount sanction is as follows:

¶26

Sr.	Date of	Nature	Loan Amount	Interest	Security
No.	Sanction	of Facility
1.	06.10.2015	Housing Loan TL	₹31,00,000/-	@ 9.95% per annum	Flat No.105 and 106,
				floating	1st floor,
				rate.	Everest Heights, Survey No. 18,

¶27

Page 3 of 8

¶28

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶29

			Hissa No.5/A/ 4, Village Jalgaon,
			Dist.
			Ratnagiri
			– 415
			712
Total	-	₹31,00,000/-	- -

¶30

(4) On 11.09.2015, defendants signed and executed the loan and security documents as set out in paragraph nos. (vii) (Page No.6) of the Original Application. Defendants mortgaged Flat No.105 and 106, 1^st floor, Everest Heights, Survey No. 18, Hissa No.5/A/4, Village Jalgaon, Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 712 to secure the loan.

¶31

The Defendants executed following documents pursuant the Sanction letter dated 06.10.2015:-

¶32

(a) Loan Agreement dated 11.09.2015 for an amount of ₹3100,000/- @ B.R. 9.95% p.a. floating with EMI of ₹30,276/- (as per CBS System) (different EMI amount mentioned in Sanction letter i.e. ₹29,813/-) ;

¶33

(b) Demand Promissory Note dated 11.09.2015 for an amount of ₹31,00,000/-;

¶34

¶35

(d) Letter of Interest Variation dated

¶36

Page 4 of 8

¶37

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶38

11.09.2015;

¶39

(e) Form of Guarantee for Advances & Credit Generally dated 11.09.2015;

¶40

(f) Memorandum of Entry dated 11.09.2015;

¶41

(g) Debt Acknowledgement dated 28.05.2019 for an amount of ₹30,22,718/- indebtness as on 30.09.2018.

¶42

(5) After availing the loan, defendants did not adhere to the financial discipline and committed default in payment of instalments and repayment of the loan and accordingly the accounts of the borrowers were declared as Non-Performing Asset (N.P.A) on 29.10.2018 as per RBI Guidelines. Therefore, on 21.08.2019, the applicant, through its advocate, called upon defendants to liquidate the outstanding in the sum of ₹33,13,283/- as on 08.08.2019 together with further interest @ 9.60% with monthly rests alongwith Penal Interest @ 2 % p.a. thereon from 09.08.2019 till payment and /or realization within a period of 7 days from the date of notice. Despite notice, defendant nos. 1 and 2 failed and neglected to pay.

¶43

(6) As of 08.08.2019, there was owing, due and payable by defendants to the applicant the aggregate sum of ₹33,13,283/- together with future interest at contractual rate of interest (i.e. 9.60% per annum presently) with monthly rests from 09.08.2019 till full and final payment and/or

¶44

Page 5 of 8

¶45

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶46

realization of the entire debt. The applicant has maintained the loan ledger extract and the entries posted therein are made in the usual and ordinary course of the banking business.

¶47

(7) Since, defendants failed and neglected to make the payment, the applicant was left with no other alternate but to file the Original Application which was presented on 17.09.2019.

¶48

(8) The applicant has filed affidavit (exhibit-6) in lieu of examination in chief of Mr Abhishek Kumar Sinha, Branch Manager and list of documents (exhibit-7) thereby adducing in evidence the documents at AW-1 to AW-24, which are admitted in evidence, read, recorded and exhibited.

¶49

(9) Accordingly, in the Original Application was filed for the recovery of ₹33,13,283/- as on 08.08.2019 alongwith further interest @ 9.60% per annum from the date of presentation of the Original Application, that is, 17.09.2019 till payment/realisation.

¶50

(10) The Tribunal has scrutinised and examined the allegations contained in the Original Application and analysed the evidence adduced by the applicant which has gone unchallenged, uncontroverted and unrebutted.

¶51

(11) Upon careful scrutiny and the examination of the Original Application, analysing the evidence and giving due weightage to the documentary evidence

¶52

Page 6 of 8

¶53

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶54

adduced by the applicant, the Tribunal views that there is no reason to disbelieve the claim made by the applicant bank.

¶55

(12) In view of the observations made hereinabove, Original Application filed by the applicant deserves to be allowed.

¶56

(13) Hence, the following order:

¶57

ORDER

¶58

(A) The Original Application No.83 of 2022 is allowed with costs.

¶59

(B) Defendant nos. 1 and 2 are ordered and directed to pay to the applicant, either jointly or severally, the aggregate sum of ₹33,13,283/- as on 08.08.2019 alongwith further interest @ 9.60% per annum from the Original Application’s presentation date, that is, 17.09.2019 till payment/realization.

¶60

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting movable mortgaged property, that is, Flat No.105 and 106, 1^st floor, Everest Heights, Survey No. 18, Hissa No.5/A/4, Village Jalgaon, Dist. Ratnagiri – 415 712.

¶61

(D) Defendant nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to redeem the mortgage as per law failing which the applicant has right to proceed to sell the mortgaged property and recover dues as per law.

¶62

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶63

(F) The learned Registrar is directed to send a copy of

¶64

Page 7 of 8

¶65

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2022

¶66

the judgment and recovery certificate to (i) the applicant, (ii) defendant and (iii) the Recovery Officer by post and email.

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

(Harish Kumar Kaushik) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶69

Page 8 of 8

Central Bank of India v. Jatin Jaysingh Padaya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Jatin Jaysingh Padaya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahim Panjwani versus Hdfc Bank Limited

Rahim Panjwani versus Hdfc Bank Limited and Ors.

Mr Jhanjh Bhiswajit Nemaichandra versus Saraswat Cooperative Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus M S Gauri

Bank of Maharashtra versus New Classic Tarpauline through Its Prop Nirmala Pramod Agarwal

Asrec (India) Limited versus vivi homes Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.