Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mark Andrade

DRT4 Oct 2025OA/946/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's recovery application against the defaulting borrower who appeared ex-parte. The court awarded the principal amount plus future interest at 9% per annum and confirmed rights to recover dues from the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.29,30,831/- with future interest @9% p.a.; right to sell mortgaged property; Issue Recovery Certificate.

State Bank of India versus Mark Andrade — Specific Performance | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on .. 24.06.2022 Registered on .. 13.06.2023 Decided on .. 04.10.2025 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--03--10

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 946/2023.

¶3

State Bank of India,

¶4

A Banking Company constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 and having its Corporate Office at State Bank Bhavan, Nariman Point, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai 400021 and its branch at – Dasve, Lavasa, where the Credit facility was granted and thereafter account migrated to State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Second Floor, Wardhaman, Seven Loves Chowk, Plot No. 321/A/3, Mahatma Phule Peth, Pune 411 042.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Mark Maxim Andrade s/o Maxim Mariano Andrade, C-621, Uttara Apartment, Jankalyan Nagar, Malad West, Opp. Police Station, Mumbai 400 095. … Defendant

¶8

Sanap ( OA No. 946/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶9

Appearances :- For Applicant For Defendant

¶10

Advocate Sudha Koloti. Ex parte.

¶11

Total Claim Amount – Rs.29,30,831/-

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

(Delivered on 04^th October, 2025)

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.29,30,831/- together with future interest @9.75% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application dated 09.09.2015 of the defendant for purchase of housing property, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Housing loan facility of Rs.30,80,000/- inclusive of Rin Raksha Loan for Rs.80,200/- to the defendant vide Arrangement Letter dated 09.11.2015.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendant has also executed deed of mortgage dated 09.11.2015 in respect of all that piece and parcel of the property bearing Flat No. 6, First Floor, admeasuring 591

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 946/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶19

square feet carpet, in event center street, building namely Club View Wing No. 13, constructed on S. No. 33/3 and 28/1, Lot No. 41 being and lying at village Dasve, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune, in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 14.11.2019, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as Non Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 18.05.2020, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶21

Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 26.06.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Smt. Padmaja Pol, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-14

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 946/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶25

along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9.75% per annum. 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.

¶29

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A} Original Application No. 946/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶32

B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.29,30,831/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Thirty Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty One only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 24.06.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this

¶33

Sanap ( OA No. 946/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶34

operative order.

¶35

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of the property bearing Flat No. 6, First Floor, admeasuring 591 square feet carpet, in event center street, building namely Club View Wing No. 13, constructed on S. No. 33/3 and 28/1, Lot No. 41 being and lying at village Dasve, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.6 of the Original Application.

¶36

D} The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶37

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶38

F} The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendant.

¶39

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 04.10.2025 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶40

Sanap ( OA No. 946/2023 ) 5 of 5

State Bank of India v. Mark Andrade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mark Andrade

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

Uco Bank versus Sachin Thombare

State Bank of India versus Swati

Union Bank of India versus Rahul Raje Bhosale

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shakuntala

Bank of India versus Ganpat Malekar

Canara Bank versus Narayan