Allowed

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. Ramdas

DRT11 Feb 2025OA/97/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Maharashtra Gramin Bank for recovery of Rs.44.56 lakhs outstanding term loan principal and interest from the borrower and guarantors. The court directed payment of principal with reduced future interest at 9% per annum and confirmed security through mortgage and hypothecation.

What did the court decide?

Directed Defendants to pay Rs.44,56,372/- with future interest @9% p.a. jointly and severally; ordered sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties to recover dues; issued Recovery Certificate.

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus Ramdas — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 27.01.2022 Registered on: 29.04.2022 Decided on: 11.02.2025 Duration: Y M D 03 00 15

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J.R. Chauhan, Presiding officer) TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.44,56,372/-

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.97/2022

¶4

Maharashtra Gramin Bank, A Scheduled Commercial Bank Constituted under Section 3 of the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 and also a Banking Company under section 5 (c) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) having its Head Office at Plot No. 42, Gat No. 33, Golwadi, Growth Centre, Waluj Mahanagar-IV, CIDCO, Aurangabad having its Branch at Kannad, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad through its Branch Manager and Principal Officer Shri Amit S/o Gokul Baviskar.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Ramdas Walmik Ghule , R/o : At Chinchpur Kd, Post : Chapaner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad. Pin – 431 103.

¶8

Shri Appa Ramdas Ghule, R/o : At Chinchpur Kd, Post : Chapaner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad.

¶9

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 1 of 12

¶10

Pin – 431 103.

¶11

1. Shri Kantilal Ramdas Ghule, R/o: At Chinchpur Kd, Post: Chapaner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad. Pin – 431 103

¶12

Smt. Anjanabai Ramdas Ghule, R/o : At Chinchpur Kd, Post : Chapaner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad. Pin – 431 103.

¶13

Shri Laxman Bhavani Kale, R/o: At Jaitapur, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad. Pin – 431 103.

¶14

Shri Dipak Bapusaheb Walunje , R/o : Kheda, Post : Chapaner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad. Pin – 431 103.

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

… Defendants

¶17

For the Applicant Mr. J.R. Kalyankar - Advocate For Defendant Nos.1 to 6 Ex-parte

¶18

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 11^th February, 2025)

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.44,56,372/- (Rupees Forty-Four Lacs Fifty-Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy-Two

¶20

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 2 of 12

¶21

only) together with interest applied up to 27.01.2022 and future interest @12.95% per annum with yearly rests + costs expenses from 28.01.2022 from the date of filing of this Original Application till the full realization of the claim amount from the defendant Nos.1 to 6 and against the person and properties of the defendant Nos.1 to 6 jointly and severally.

¶22

Brief facts of the application are as under :

¶23

The defendant Nos.1 to 4 were in need of financial assistance and applied to the applicant bank on 01^st April, 2013 (wrongly mentioned as 2023) for Agricultural Term Loan facility of Rs.31,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-One Lacs only) for laying of pipe line (lift irrigation) alongwith project report. As per the Sanction Letter dated 13^th September, 2013, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term Loan facility of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lacs only) to the defendant Nos.1 to 4 alongwith the rate of interest @13.50% per annum with yearly rests and it was agreed that @2% penal interest will be charged in case of default. The repayment of the said Term Loan of Rs.25 Lacs (Rupees Twenty-Five Lacs only) has to be paid in five

¶24

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 3 of 12

¶25

years by yearly installment of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs only) plus interest. The defendant Nos.5 and 6 stood as guarantors in their personal guarantee to the Agriculture Term Loan of Rs.25 Lacs (Rupees Twenty-Five Lacs only) availed by the defendant Nos.1 to 4.

¶26

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant No.1 to 6 have executed necessary loan and security documents mentioned at Paragraph No. 05.05 and 05.06 of the O.A. The defendant Nos.1 to 6 have executed demand promissory Note for Rs.25,00,000/- on 30.10.2013; Hypothecation Agreement dated 30.10.2013 executed by defendant Nos.1 to 4;

¶27

To secure the Term Loan facility of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Lacs only), the defendant Nos.1 to 4 have executed Mortgage Deed registered with Sub-Registrar, Kannad at Sr.No.4607 on 17.10.2013 to create charge on 1.26 Hectare land in Gat No.55 situated at Hasankheda, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad belongs to the defendant No.1. Land admeasuring 2.50 Hectare in Gat No.74 and land in Gat No.102 admeasuring 1.22 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh., belongs to defendant No.1 and land in

¶28

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 4 of 12

¶29

Gat No.77 admeasuring 2.02 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda belongs to defendant No.2 and the land in Gat No.74 admeasuring 3.03 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda belongs to defendant No.3 and land in Gat No.77 admeasuring 2.05 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda, Taluka Kannad belongs to defendant No.4 as mentioned in Paragraph No.5.8 of the Original Application. The defendant No.5 and 6 stood as a guarantors in their personal capacity to the loan facility availed by the defendant Nos.1 to 4 and executed the Deed of Guarantee on 30.10.2013 in favour of the applicant bank. The defendants have agreed to pay interest @ 13.50% per annum with yearly rests, cost and expenses and had also agreed to abide by and comply with the terms and conditions of the loan agreements executed by them.

¶30

The applicant bank further submitted that the defendant Nos.1 to 4 have acknowledged and executed the Balance and Security Confirmation Letters on 25.09.2016 and 27.09.2016 separately. While availing the term loan facility, the defendant Nos.1 to 4 has to stick up to the terms and conditions of the sanction by repaying the yearly loan

¶31

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 5 of 12

¶32

installment of Rs.5 Lacs plus interest every year regularly but they have defaulted in maintaining the loan account regularly and as such the defendants found negligent, hence their loan account become sticky and stagnant. Hence, the account of the defendant Nos.1 to 4 has classified as NonPerforming Asset in the books of account of the applicant bank as per prudential Income Recognition and Asset Classification (IRAC) norms set by the Reserve Bank of India on 30.06.2021.

¶33

The detailed particulars of the claim are as under:

¶34

Sr.No.	Type of loan account	Balancne in the account as per extract of account in Rs.	Unapplied interest till suit date in Rs.	Total dues outstanding as on the date of the suit in R.
		(A)	(B)	(A + B)
01	Term Loan for laying Pipeline (Lift Irrigation)	41,45,627.00	3,10,745.00	44.56,372.00
	Total	41,45,627.00	3,10,745.00	44.56,372.00

¶35

The applicant bank contended that the applicant bank has maintained in its ordinary course of business the statement of account as per the section 4 of the Bankers Books Evidence Act, 1891 stating the rate of interest or compound interest and the certificate that it has been charged at such

¶36

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 6 of 12

¶37

rate and capitalized at such periodical rests as permitted by the Reserve Bank of India. The defendants have committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. The account of the defendants classified as NPA on 30.06.2021. Therefore, on 24.12.2021 the applicant Bank issued mandatory demand notice to the defendant Nos. 1 to 6 calling upon them to pay the dues of the applicant bank. The defendants have failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶38

In this matter, as per the service affidavit (Exhibit-12), the defendant Nos.1, 5 and 6 were served by hand and the defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4 have been served through affixation. Despite service of summons, the defendant Nos. 1 to 6 did not choose to enter their appearance either personally or through their Advocate and were not interested in filing the Written Statement or has nothing to show cause. Hence, the defendant nos.1 to 6 proceeded exparte as per Order dated 20^th September, 2023.

¶39

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Evidence (Exhibit-04) of Mr. Amit s/o Gokul Baviskar, Branch Head

¶40

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 7 of 12

¶41

of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transactions documents at Sr. Nos. Annexure A-1 to Annexure A-24 alongwith List of Documents (Exhibit-5), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank. The applicant bank has filed Written Notes of Arguments at Exhhibit-13.

¶42

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant bank and gone through the written submissions.

¶43

Since the defendants 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.

¶44

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest for the Term Loan facility together with further interest @12.95% per annum with yearly rests from the date of this recovery claim till the full realization of the claim amounts from the defendant Nos.1 to 6 jointly and severally. 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.

¶45

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 8 of 12

¶46

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(A) Original Application No.97/2022 is allowed with cost.

¶49

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 6 are hereby ordered and directed jointly and severally to pay to the applicant the aggregate sum of Rs.44,56,372/(Rupees Forty-Four Lacs Fifty-Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy-Two only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the original application i.e. 27^th January, 2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶50

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the Mortgage Deed in respect of the immovable properties as mentioned in Para No.3-A more particularly at Annexure-A0 of the Original Application at Page No.32.

¶51

a) Property situated at Gat No. 55 belongs to defendant No.1, admeasuring 1.26 Hectare situated at Hasankheda, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad,

¶52

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 9 of 12

¶53

which are bounded as under :

¶54

East	West	South	North
Nala	Bhaskar	Manohar	Baburao
	Ramrao	Walmik	Walmik

¶55

b) Property situated at Gat No.74 belongs to defendant No.1 admeasuring 2.50 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad, which are bounded as under:

¶56

East	West	South	North
Ramesh	Prakaksh	Kantilal	Baburao
Ramrao	Pandurang	Ramdas	Walmik

¶57

c) Property situated at Gat No.102 belongs to defendant No.1 admeasuring 1.22 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad, which are bounded as under:

¶58

East	West	South	North
Nala	Baliram	Suresh	Ambadas
	Raybhan	Baburao	Tatya

¶59

¶60

d) Property situated at Gat No.77 belongs to defendant No.2 admeasuring 2.02 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad, which are bounded as under:

¶61

East	West	South	North
Subhash	Kalabai	Anjanabai	Sandu
Pandurang	Walmik	Ramdas	Rangnath

¶62

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 10 of 12

¶63

e) Property situated at Gat No.74 belongs to defendant No.3 admeasuring 3.03 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad, which are bounded as under:

¶64

East	West	South	North
Ramesh	Prakash	Shiv /	Ramdas
Ramrao	Pandurang	Boundary	Walmik

¶65

f) Property situated at Gat No.77 belongs to defendant No.4 admeasuring 2.05 Hectare situated at Chinchkheda Kh, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad, which are bounded as under:

¶66

East	West	South	North
Subhash	Deochand	Manohar	Appasaheb
Pandurang	Jagannath	Walmik	Ramdas

¶67

(D) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the

¶68

Deed of Hypothecation for all those pieces and parcels of land situate being and lying at Village Chinchkheda Kh. Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad admeasuring 12.08 HR and bearing Survey Nos.55,74,77 and 102. The tools equipment / fixtures / boats / machines, tractor / power tiller / tube well / electric motors / diesel / engine and other movables connected with and relating to farming / raring of cattle and / or flock / fishing /

¶69

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 11 of 12

¶70

sericulture as is mentioned in the List of Documents Exhibit-05 at Annexure A-6 dated 30.10.2013.

¶71

(E) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged and hypothecated properties to recover its dues.

¶72

(F) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶73

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

¶74

Pronounced in open Court. Date : 11.02.2025.

¶75

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

¶76

[SBJ] (OA No.97/2022) Page 12 of 12

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. Ramdas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. Ramdas

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Chandrakant

State Bank of India versus M/S Shree Sai Sports

State Bank of India versus Gayabai Bajirao Shinde