Allowed

Uco Bank v. Avinash Shinde

DRT29 Oct 2025OA/981/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by UCO Bank for recovery of outstanding dues totaling Rs. 25,56,295/- from seven respondents. The Tribunal fixed future interest at 9% p.a. and granted a secured charge on specified immovable properties, directing the issue of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 25,56,295/- with future interest @9% p.a. secured by charge on specified lands; Issue of Recovery Certificate.

Uco Bank versus Avinash Shinde — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 26.12.2019 Registered on: 23.08.2022 Decided on: 29.10.2025 Duration: Y M D 05 10 03

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE. (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.981/2022.

¶3

UCO Bank ,

¶4

A Corporate Body constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at – 10, B.T.M. Sarani, Kolkata and branch amongst other places at Market Yard, Indapur Road, Baramati, Taluka Baramati, District Pune.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Shri. Avinash Ratilal Shinde

¶8

Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture

¶9

2. Shri. Ratilal Pandurang Shinde Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture

¶10

3 . Sou. Yamunabai Ratilal Shinde

¶11

Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture 1 to 3 R/at – 258, Gavthan, At & Post Kazad, Taluka Indapur, Dist.Pune-413 104.

¶12

4. Shri. Ankush Kashinath Mhetre Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture R/at -195, Panmala, Kazad, Taluka Indapur, Dist. Pune-413 104.

¶13

5. Shri. Baburao Dattatraya Zagade Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture R/at – 258, Gavthan, At & Post Kazad, Taluka Indapur, Dist.Pune-413 104.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 1 of 9

[ANIL]

6. Shri. Balasaheb Dashrath Mhetre Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture R/at -195, Panmala, Kazad, Taluka Indapur, Dist. Pune-413 104

¶18

7. Shri. Namdeo Narayan Shinde Age-Adult, Occ.:- Agriculture R/at -At & Post, Kazad, Taluka Indapur, Dist. Pune-413 104.

¶19

… Defendants

¶20

APPEARANCES

¶21

For the Applicant Mr. R. B. Ganbote - Advocate For the Defendants Ex-parte.

¶22

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.25,56,295/-.

¶23

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 29^th October, 2025)

¶24

Applicant Bank filed application for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs.25,56,295/- [i.e.Rs.2,61,104/- towards KCC Loan Account No.12670500001048; Rs.16,96,279/- towards Term Loan Account No.12670600003688; Rs.1,26,522/- towards KCC Loan Account No.126705000001217; Rs.3,09,718/- towards Rescheduled Account No.12670610006597; & Rs.1,62,672/- towards Rescheduled Account No.12670610006603] together with future interest thereon @11.5%, @15.5% p.a. and @9% p.a. from Defendant Nos.1 to 7 respectively with half yearly rests from the date of filing of the application till repayment/realization of entire dues.

¶25

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶26

Defendant Nos.1,2, 4 and 5 approached the Applicant Bank and requested for a KCC Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- for Crop Loan to Defendant No.1 and 2. Defendants No.3 & 4 offered them as

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 2 of 9

[ANIL]

Guarantor for Securing the KCC to be availed by Defendant No.1 and 2.

¶31

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 favorably and sanctioned them KCC Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- for KCC Loan on 04.02.2005, on certain terms and conditions.

¶32

Defendant No. 1,2, 4 and 5 have executed certain documents on 04.02.2005 to secure the above said loan facilities in favour of the applicant bank as mentioned in Para No.5.5 of the Original Application.

¶33

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 alongwith Defendant No.4 & 6 again approached the Applicant Bank on 10.09.2007 and requested for renewal of KCC of Rs.1,00,000/-; Term Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- for grape garden and Term Loan of Rs.4,00,000/- for water tank (Total Rs.6,50,000/-) to defendant Nos.1 to 3 and defendant Nos. 4 and 6 offered themselves as Guarantors for the said loan facilities to be availed by defendant Nos. 1 to 3.

¶34

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos.1 to 3, 4 & 6 and sanctioned them KCC of Rs.1,00,000/-; Term Loan of Rs.1,50,000/- for Grape Garden and Term Loan of Rs.4,00,000/- for Water Tank (Total Rs.6,50,000/-) on 09.10.2007 on certain terms and conditions.

¶35

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, 4 & 6 have executed certain documents in favour of the applicant bank to secure the above said loan facilities as mentioned in Para No.5.10 of the Original Application.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 3 of 9

[ANIL]

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, 4 & 6 again approached the applicant bank in August 2011 and requested for renewal of KCC of Rs.1,00,000/- for Crop Loan to Defendant Nos.1 to 3. Defendant Nos. 4 & 6 again offered themselves as Guarantors for securing KCC to be availed by Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 from applicant bank.

¶40

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos.1 to 3, 4 & 6 and renewed them KCC of Rs.1,00,000/- on 07.09.2011 for Crop Loan on certain terms and conditions.

¶41

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, 4 & 6 have executed certain documents in favour of the applicant bank to secure the above said loan facilities as mentioned in Para No.5.15 of the Original Application.

¶42

Defendant No.2 & 3 have executed E Karar (Declarative Mortgage) and charged the property in favour of the applicant bank to secure the Working Capital Term Loan sanctioned to Defendant Nos.1 to 3 by the applicant bank i.e. all that piece and parcel of Gat No.6 admeasuring 01 Hector 00 Aar assessed at Rs.2.44 Ps.; Gat No.11 (P) admeasuring 00 Hector 09 Aar assessed at Rs.0.20Ps.; Gat No.28 admeasuring 00 Hector 98 Aar assessed at Rs.2.19 Ps; Gat No.26 admeasuring 00 Hector 15 Aar assessed at Rs.0.37 Ps; and Gat No.31 admeasuring 00 Hector 56 Aar assessed at Rs.0.31Ps. at village Kazad, Taluka Indapur, within the limits of Registration District Pune, Sub Registration District Baramati, District Pune, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.17 of the Original Application.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 4 of 9

[ANIL]

Further, Defendant Nos.1 and 2 have executed five separate acknowledgments on 01.04.2011, 10.04.2012, 10.09.2013, 30.06.2015 and 30.09.2017 and confirmed the balance in KCC account of Rs.1 Lakh of Defendant Nos. 1 to 3.

¶47

Thereafter, again Defendant Nos.1 to 3 & 5 & 7 approached the Applicant Bank on 02.06.2014 and requested for rescheduling of loan due to failure of Crop availed by Defendant Nos.1 to 3 from the applicant bank.

¶48

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 & 5 & 7 favourably and rescheduled loan to Defendant No.1 and accordingly issued letter on 11.08.2014 on certain terms and conditions.

¶49

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 & 7 have executed certain documents to secure the above said loan facilities in favour of the applicant bank as mentioned in Para No.5.22 of the Original Application.

¶50

Thereafter, again Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 5 & 7 approached the Applicant Bank on 01.08.2014 and requested for rescheduling of loan due to failure of Crop availed by Defendant Nos.1 to 3 from the applicant bank.

¶51

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 & 5 & 7 favourably and rescheduled loan to Defendant No.1 and accordingly issued letter on 01.08.2014 on certain terms and conditions.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 5 of 9

[ANIL]

Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 & 7 have executed certain documents to secure the above said loan facilities in favour of the applicant bank as mentioned in Para No.5.26 of the Original Application.

¶56

It is contended that defendant Nos.1 to 3 are not paying the installments in both Term Loan Accounts and Rescheduled Account and also not paying the interest in KCC Account and the amounts are outstanding in all the accounts with future uncharged interest and penal interest till date. Hence, all the accounts of defendants with the Applicant Bank turned Non Performing Assets as per the Reserve Bank of India norms.

¶57

There are overdue in all the loan accounts and Defendant No.1 to 3 are not paying interest in KCC account and also not paying installments in both the Term Loan accounts as agreed and committed breach of terms and conditions of the sanction. Therefore, the applicant bank has demanded payment by personal visits and telephonically. However, the defendants have given only false promises and have failed to regularize the account or close the account.

¶58

Hence, this application is filed.

¶59

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against them vide Order dated 16.04.2025 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 6 of 9

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit6) of Mr. Lokesh Kumar, Chief Manager, which supports the case of the applicant elucidated in the application.

¶64

The Applicant Bank has produced in evidence the original loan documents at Exhs.-AW-1 to AW-47, which corroborate the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶65

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

¶66

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

¶67

The Applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets. Therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶68

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ @11.5%, @15.5% p.a. and @9% p.a. respectively in the Accounts. Considering the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple) for all the loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 7 of 9

[ANIL]

11. Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶73

ORDER

¶74

(A) Original Application No.981/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶75

Defendant Nos.1 to 7 shall jointly or severally pay an aggregate amount of Rs.25,56,295/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Five only) to the applicant bank as under –

¶76

(B) Out of Rs. 25,56,295/-, Defendant Nos.1, 2, 4 & 5 either jointly or severally shall pay an amount of Rs.2,61,104/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Sixty One Thousand One Hundred Four only) towards KCC Loan A/c No.12670500001048 with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.12.2019 till payment /realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶77

Out of Rs. 25,56,295/-, Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 4 & 6 either jointly or severally shall pay an amount of Rs.18,22,801/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Eight Hundred One only) towards Term Loan A/c No.12670600003688 & towards KCC Loan A/c No.126705000001217 with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.12.2019 till payment /realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶78

Out of Rs. 25,56,295/-, Defendant Nos.1 to 3 and 5 & 7 either jointly or severally shall pay an amount of Rs.4,72,390/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Seventy Two Thousand Three Hundred Ninety only) towards Rescheduled A/c No.12670610006597; and towards Rescheduled A/c No.12670610006603 with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.12.2019 till payment /realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.981/2022)

Page 8 of 9

[ANIL]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by keeping charge on the following immovable properties i.e. all that piece and parcel of Gat No.6 admeasuring 01 Hector 00 Aar assessed at Rs.2.44 Ps.; Gat No.11 (P) admeasuring 00 Hector 09 Aar assessed at Rs.0.20Ps.; Gat No.28 admeasuring 00 Hector 98 Aar assessed at Rs.2.19 Ps; Gat No.26 admeasuring 00 Hector 15 Aar assessed at Rs.0.37 Ps; and Gat No.31 admeasuring 00 Hector 56 Aar assessed at Rs.0.31Ps. at village Kazad, Taluka Indapur, within the limits of Registration District Pune, Sub Registration District Baramati, District Pune, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.17 of the Original Application.

¶83

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶84

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶85

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

¶86

Place: Pune Date: 29.10.2025

¶87

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶88

(OA No.981/2022)

¶89

Page 9 of 9

¶90

[ANIL]

Uco Bank v. Avinash Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Avinash Shinde

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

Punjab National Bank (Oriental Bank of Commerce) versus M/S. Shivraj Tyres, Prop. Mr. Akash Shivaji Nawale

Union Bank of India versus Revanappa

Federal Bank versus Vijay

Bank of India versus M/s. Rahul Engineering Works Prop. Mr. Surekhs Ashok ,Mohite

Uco Bank versus Nilesh Dattatraya Nagave

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S. Anil Goat Breed Farm Prop. Mr. Anil Uddhav Suryavamshi