Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Tajmul Nurmhammad Patel

DRT19 Nov 2025OA/959/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an Original Application regarding a term loan default, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's claim for principal and directed the defendants to pay the outstanding sum along with future interest at 9% p.a., secured by mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 22,25,789.56 with future interest @ 9% p.a. simple from 11.12.2024; bank entitled to sell mortgaged property.

Union Bank of India versus Tajmul Nurmhammad Patel — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 11.12.2024 Registered on: 31.12.2024 Decided on: 19.11.2025 Duration: Y M D 00 11 08

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 959/2024

¶3

Union Bank of India,

¶4

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 22,25,789.56/-

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking

¶6

companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Registered office at 239, Vidhan

¶7

Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Branch

¶8

Bhusawal through its Power of Attorney Mr. Tushar

¶9

Dadarao Nawale (Branch Head), Age: 45 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon 425201.

… Applicant

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 1 of 9

[AMBADAS]

Versus

1. Mr. Tajmul Nurmhammad Patel, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: At 656-15, Patel Galli, Sakegaon, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon 425201.

¶16

2. Mr. Noor Mohammad Musa Patel, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: At 656-15, Patel Galli, Sakegaon, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon 425201.

¶17

3. Mr. Ajaj Ahmed Noor Ahmed, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: At 656-15, Patel Galli, Sakegaon, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon 425201.

¶18

…Defendants

¶19

APPEARANCES For the Applicant For Defendants

¶20

Mr. K. D. Pande -Advocate Ex-parte

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 2 of 9

[AMBADAS]

JUDGMENT Delivered on 198.11.2025

¶25

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶26

recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,25,789.56/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Twenty Five Thousand, Seven Hundred Eighty Nine and Fifty Six Paisa only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 11.12.2024, until the date of realization

¶27

of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶28

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶29

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 & 2 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for a Term loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned a Term loan facility of Rs. 19,72,000/- vide sanction letter dated 12.02.2016 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid

¶30

loan was @12.40% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendants also

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 3 of 9

[AMBADAS]

agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated

¶35

damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶36

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, registered mortgage deed bearing daybook no. 829 dated 16.02.2016, letter of undertaking, demand promissory note, & hypothecation agreement. Additionally defendant No. 3 stood as guarantor for defendant No. 1 & 2 and executed deed of guarantee on 17.02.2016 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶37

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant No. 1 & 2 created first charge over their immovable property under daybook no. 829 dated 16.02.2016 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property-

¶38

All that piece and parcel of Residential Plot bearing CTS No. 295 Eastern Side admeasuring 212.65 sq.mtrs., situated at Mauje Sakegaon ,Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under.

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 4 of 9

[AMBADAS]

East: Road, West: Remaining Portion of same CTS No. 295, South: CTS No. 296, North: Road.

¶43

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly 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 and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 29.05.2023. Therefore, on 16.11.2024 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 5 of 9

[AMBADAS]

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 17.04.2025.

¶48

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Tushar Dadarao Nawale, Branch Head of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-12 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶49

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

¶50

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

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 6 of 9

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable property of the borrowers which is mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶55

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.40% p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 11.12.2024 of this application till realization of the claim amount. 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.

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(A) Original Application No. 959/2024 is allowed with

¶58

costs.

¶59

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 22,25,789.56/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Twenty Five Thousand, Seven Hundred Eighty Nine and Fifty Six Paisa only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 11.12.2024 till full

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 7 of 9

[AMBADAS]

payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶64

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable property bearing daybook no. 829 vide registered simple mortgage deed dated 16.02.2016 at Exh. A-7 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶65

All that piece and parcel of Residential Plot bearing CTS No. 295 Eastern Side admeasuring 212.65 sq.mtrs., situated at Mauje Sakegaon ,Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under. East: Road, West: Remaining Portion of same CTS No. 295, South: CTS No. 296, North: Road.

¶66

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶67

(E)

¶68

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

(OA No.959/2024)

Page 8 of 9

[AMBADAS]

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

¶73

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.19.11.2025

¶76

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

¶77

(OA No.959/2024)

¶78

Page 9 of 9

¶79

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Tajmul Nurmhammad Patel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Tajmul Nurmhammad Patel

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Dattatray Laxman Nalage

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Vimal Tatyasaheb Pendbhaje

Union Bank of India versus Ravindra Pitambar Patil

Bayadabai Pandit Bhole versus Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S. Akshara Designer Sarees

Bank of Baroda versus Sanjay Sahebrao Dhone