Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Dhutale Transport, through Its Proprietor Shir Ravi S/O Kishan Dhutale

DRT18 Sept 2025OA/98/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed an application under Section 19 of the RDDBFI Act, 1993 for recovery of loan dues. The court held the defendants liable to pay the outstanding bank loans with future interest, declared a charge on their hypothecated properties, and directed the issuance of recovery certificates due to the defendants' absence.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay outstanding loan amounts of Rs. 37,40,413/- with future interest, declaring charge on hypothecated properties, and issuing recovery certificates.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Dhutale Transport… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Page 1 of 4 O.A. No. 98/2024

¶2

PRESENTED ON : 10.01.2024 REGISTERED ON : 07.05.2024

¶3

Exh. No. 11

¶4

BEFORE THE PO, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR

¶5

Delivered by Pankaj Kumar

O.A. No. 98/2024

Bank of Baroda

: Applicant

A body corporate established under Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 (Act No. V of 1970), having its Head Office at Mandvi,

¶10

Baroda – 390 006, Gujarat,

¶11

having branches all over India and abroad including Branch at Jog Chowk, Annie Besant Road, Amravati Phone No. 0721-2572428, 2651878 Email ID : [email protected]

¶12

Acting through its officer Shri Jugal Kishor Verma, Occ. : Service

¶13

Versus

¶14

1. M/s Dhutale Transport : Defendants

¶15

A proprietary concern acting through its proprietor Shri Ravi S/o Kisan Dhutale, Aged about : 45 Years, Occ. : Business, Address : Ward No. 6, Ayodhya

¶16

Nagar, Tah. Morshi, Dist. – Amravati - 444905

¶17

2. Shri Ravi S/o Kisan Dhutale

¶18

Aged about : 45 Years, Occ. : Business, Address : Ward No. 6, Ayodhya Nagar, Tah. Morshi, Dist. – Amravati - 444905

¶19

Page 2 of 4 O.A. No. 98/2024

¶20

Learned Counsel for Applicant	Adv. Y. Ramani Patro
Defendants Set Exparte On	18.10.2024

¶21

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 18^th Day of September, 2025)

¶22

This is an application filed by the applicant U/s 19 of RDB Act, 1993 against defendants for recovery of aggregate amount of Rs. 37,40,413/- with costs and future interest with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization as under :

¶23

A. An amount of Rs. 28,98,573.04 outstanding in Term Loan Account No. 37460600000684 with costs and future interest @11.15% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization .

¶24

B. An amount of Rs. 6,94,760.35 outstanding in BGECLS Account No. 37460600000985 with costs and future interest @7.85% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization .

¶25

C. An amount of Rs. 1,47,079.5 outstanding in BGECL 2.0 Account No. 37460600001367 with costs and future interest @9.25% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till the date of realization .

¶26

Though, defendant nos. 1 & 2 were duly served with the suit summons vide Exh. 5 & 6, they failed to cause appearance before this Tribunal to defend their case despite granting several adjournments. Hence, the proceeding against defendant nos. 1 & 2 was set exparte on 18.10.2024.

¶27

Page 3 of 4 O.A. No. 98/2024

¶28

The applicant has filed its Claim Affidavit (Exh. 7) alongwith List of Documents (Exh. 8), annexing therewith 16 documents. The original documents therein are marked as Exh. AW-1/1 to AW-1/15. The applicant has stated in the O.A. as well as in claim affidavit that no penal interest has been charged in the loan accounts.

¶29

Heard Learned counsel for the applicant.

¶30

As stated supra, defendants remained exparte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz. Exh. AW -1/1 to AW-1/15 marked on behalf of the applicant, clinches the claim of the applicant against defendants. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence adduced on behalf of applicant. Hence, defendants are liable to pay, jointly and severally, the claim of the applicant with costs and future interest.

¶31

Hence, it is ordered as under:-

¶32

ORDER

¶33

A] O.A. No. 98/2024 is allowed to the extent as under with costs.

¶34

B] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 28,98,573.04 (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Ninety Eight Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Three and Paise Four Only) outstanding in Term Loan Account No. 37460600000684 with simple future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶35

Page 4 of 4 O.A. No. 98/2024

¶36

C] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 6,94,760.35 (Rupees Six Lakh Ninety Four Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty and Paise Thirty Five Only) outstanding in BGECLS Account No. 37460600000985 with simple future interest @7.85% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶37

D] Defendants to pay jointly and severally to the applicant bank an amount of Rs. 1,47,079.5 (Rupees One Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Seventy Nine and Paise Fifty Only) outstanding in BGECL 2.0 Account No. 37460600001367 with simple future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization.

¶38

E] It is declared that charge of outstanding dues is kept on hypothecated properties of defendants as described in Schedule – I & Schedule – II in Schedule of Properties in O.A and as referred in Exh. AW-1/2, AW-1/7 & AW-1/11.

¶39

F] Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶40

G] The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the parties to this O.A at once.

¶41

Nagpur

¶42

Date: 18.09.2025

¶43

(Pankaj Kumar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal Nagpur

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Dhutale Transport, through Its Proprietor Shir Ravi S/O Kishan Dhutale

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Dhutale Transport, through Its Proprietor Shir Ravi S/O Kishan Dhutale

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

Mohammed Ashraf C a versus Indian Overseas Bank

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Akrosh Abdul Khan

Ms Siddhi Vinayak Steel and others versus Punjab National Bank

Central Bank of India versus M/S Khushboo Vastraalay

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Sunil Kumar

Punjab National Bank versus Smt. Poonam Devi