Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Bhaskar

DRT5 Feb 2026OA/1266/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal at Pune allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India for the recovery of dues from five defendants. The court sanctioned the claim for term loans, cash credits, and agricultural loans, reducing the future interest rate from 11.30% to 9% per annum simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay aggregate sum of Rs. 21,33,964/- with future interest @9% p.a. Simple; Recovery Certificate issued; Director to sell mortgaged properties.

Union Bank of India versus Bhaskar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 14.09.2023 Registered on: 05.10.2023 Decided on: 05.02.2026 Duration: Y M D 02 04 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1266/2023.

¶3

Union Bank of India ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitions & Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970 having its Head office at Union Bank Bhawan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021, and branch at Chikhathan, at House No.150, at and post Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur-413 202.

… Applicant

Versus

Mr. Bhaskar Shamrao Sarde

¶11

Mr. Sandipan Bhaskar Sarde

¶12

Mr. Nanaji Baburao Khavale

¶13

Mr. Baburao Jagnnath Khavale

¶14

Mrs. Kashibai Bhaskar Sarde

¶15

All R/at Post Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala District Solapur-413 202.

¶16

… Defendants

¶17

APPEARANCES

¶18

For the Applicant Advocate – Bhakti Rokade i/b Srinivas Y. For the Defendants Ex-parte.

¶19

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.21,33,963.92Ps.

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 1 of 7

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 5^th February, 2026)

¶24

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs.21,33,963.92Ps (Consisting of Rs.12,35,975/towards Term Loan A/c No.476606040001421; Rs.3,94,922/- towards Cash Credit A/c No.476606040001440 & Rs.5,03,766.92Ps towards Agricultural Term Loan A/c No.476605030000483} with future interest @11.30% per annum respectively with monthly rests from the date of the filing of the suit till the date of realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶25

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶26

Defendant No.1 and 2 were in need of financial assistance for the purpose of laying of new pipeline and installation of drip system and therefore, approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Term Loan Facility of Rs.10,50,000/-. Defendant No.3 and 4 agreed to stand as guarantors to the said loan facility.

¶27

The Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 28.08.2012 granted Term Loan Facility of Rs.10,50,000/- for the purpose of new pipeline and installation of drip system, on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein.

¶28

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facilities, the defendants have executed loan and security documents on 28.08.2012 as set out in Par No.5.3.2 of the Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank. So also, Defendant No.1 and 2 have created charge on their land for securing the financial assistance together with interest and cost and expenses thereon, which is as under –

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 2 of 7

[ANIL]

All that piece and parcel of the properties bearing Nos.

¶33

( i )- S.No.307, Hissa No.2, admeasuring about 00H 30R, ( ii )- S.No.308, Hissa No.3 admeasuring about 01H 14R, ( iii )- S.No.390, Hissa No.1 admeasuring about 02H 60R, ( iv )- S.No.306, Hissa No.2 admeasuring about 02H 49R and ( v )- S.No.316, Hissa No.1 admeasuring about 02H 91R lying and situated at village Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly described in Para No.5.3.4 of the Original Application.

¶34

Defendant No.1 was in need of financial assistance for the purpose of Working Capital Requirement and therefore, approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Cash Credit Facility of Rs.5,00,000/-. Defendant No.5 agreed to stood as guarantor to the said loan facility.

¶35

The Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 25.02.2019 granted Cash Credit Facility of Rs.05,00,000/- for the purpose of Working Capital requirement, on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein.

¶36

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facilities, the defendant Nos.1,2 & 5 have executed loan and security documents on 28.08.2012 as set out in Par No.5.4.2 of the Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank.

¶37

Defendant No.1 and 2 were in need of financial assistance for the purpose of Working Capital requirement and therefore,

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 3 of 7

[ANIL]

approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Agricultural Term Loan Facility of Rs.05,00,000/-. Defendant No.3 and 4 agreed to stand as guarantors to the said loan facility.

¶42

The Applicant Bank considered the request of Defendant Nos.1 and 2 and sanctioned Agricultural Term Loan Facility of Rs.5,00,000/- for the purpose of Working Capital requirement, on certain terms and conditions.

¶43

Defendant No.1 and 2 agreed to repay the limit sanctioned under the Agricultural Term Loan account within 12 months subject to its revival together with interest, cost, charges etc.

¶44

The Applicant Bank contended that Defendant No.1 and 2 have availed the loan facilities and utilized the same as per requirement and exigencies from time to time. However, Defendant No.1 and 2 not adhered to repay the outstanding amount at the foot of the said loan accounts and even the interest in the accounts is not paid on time. Hence accounts of the defendants with the applicant bank have become NPA on 08.06.2019 as per Reserve Bank of India norms. However, the applicant bank called upon the defendants through its Advocate Srinivas Yelery to pay the remaining outstanding amounts together with costs, on 17.08.2022, But defendants failed to pay the interest or installments and also failed to regularize the accounts of the defendant bank with the applicant bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶45

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per order dated 10.07.2025 passed below Application (Exh-1).

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 4 of 7

[ANIL]

5.^{The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit (Exhibit-6) of} Mr. Padmaraj Shashikant Jirage, Branch Manager has produced on record the Original Loan Transaction documents at Exhibits.AW-1 to AW-15, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶50

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

¶51

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 the reliefs claimed.

¶52

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.30% for the Loan facilities availed. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (Simple) for both the loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶53

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶54

ORDER

¶55

(A) Original Application No.1266/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶56

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 5 jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.21,33,964/- (Rupees Twenty-One Lakhs Thirty-Three Thousand Nine Hundred SixtyFour only) to the applicant bank, as follows - (i)- Out of Rs. 21,33,964/-, Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs .12,35,975/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Thirty-Five Thousand Nine Hundred Seventy-Five only) towards Term Loan A/c No. 476606040001421 with future

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 5 of 7

[ANIL]

interest @9%p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of Original Application i.e.14.09.2023 till payment/ realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to Applicant Bank.

¶61

(ii)- Out of Rs. 21,33,964/-, Defendant Nos. 1, 2 & 5 jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.3,94,222 /- (Rupees Three Lakh Ninety-Four Thousand Two Hundred Twenty-Two only) towards Cash Credit A/c No. 476606040001440 with future interest @9%p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of Original Application i.e.14.09.2023 till payment/ realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to Applicant Bank.

¶62

(iii)- Out of Rs. 21,33,964/-, Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.5,03,767/- (Rupees Five Lakh Three Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-Seven only) towards Agricultural Term Loan A/c No. 476605030000483 with future interest @9%p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of Original Application i.e.14.09.2023 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to Applicant Bank.

¶63

(C)

¶64

The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by mortgaging the immovable properties i.e. All that piece and parcel of the properties bearing Nos. ( i )-S.No.307, Hissa No.2, admeasuring 00H 30R, ( ii )-S.No.308, Hissa No.3 admeasuring 01H 14R, ( iii )-S.No.390, Hissa No.1 admeasuring 02H 60R, ( iv )-S.No.306, Hissa No.2 admeasuring 02H 49R and ( v )-S.No.316, Hissa No.1 admeasuring about 02H 91R lying and situated at village Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly described in Para No.5.3.4 of the Original Application.

(OA No.1266/2023)

Page 6 of 7

[ANIL]

(D) The applicant bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged properties to recover its dues.

¶69

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶70

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

¶71

Sd/Place : Pune (Dilip G. Murumkar) Date: 05.02.2026 Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶72

(OA No.1266/2023)

¶73

Page 7 of 7

¶74

[ANIL]

Union Bank of India v. Bhaskar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Bhaskar

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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Anil Ganpat Chavan

Union Bank of India versus Sujit Prabhakar More

State Bank of India versus Mrs Tejashri Alias Tejaswini Vikram Borate

Bank of Maharashtra versus Govind

Hdfc Bank versus M/S. Shri Ramdev Jewwllers Prop. Mr. Shantilal Hansaji Pirohit

Union Bank of India versus Anil