Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Suryakant

DRT3 Feb 2026OA/1310/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues totaling Rs.21.12 lakhs. The court modified the claimed future interest rate from 11.30% p.a. to 9% p.a. (simple). Recovery was secured against mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.21,12,147/- plus future interest @9%p.a. (Simple) from date of filing till realization, secured by mortgaged property.

Union Bank of India versus Suryakant — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 17.07.2023 Registered on: 17.10.2023 Decided on: 03.02.2026 Duration: Y M D 02 06 16

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1310/2023.

¶3

Union Bank of India ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitions & Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1980 having its Head office at Union Bank Bhawan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-21 and one of its branches at Chikhalthan, House No.150, At and Post Chikhalthan, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur-413 202. .

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mr. Suryakant Balasaheb Deshmukh 2. Mr. Dashrath Ramchandra Chavan

¶8

3 . Mr. Bharat Murlidhar Taware All R/at Village Wangi, Tal. Karmala, District Solapur-413 202.

¶9

… Defendants

¶10

APPEARANCES

¶11

For the Applicant Advocate –Mr. Srinivas Y. For the Defendants Ex-parte.

¶12

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.21,12,147.48Ps

¶13

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 3^rd February, 2026)

(OA No.1310/2023)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs.21,12,147.48Ps. [consisting of Rs.11,59,017.53Ps towards Term Loan Account No. 476606040001758 and Rs.9,53,129.95Ps towards Cash Credit Account No. 476605030000925] with future interest @11.30% per annum from the date of the filing of the suit till the date of realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶18

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶20

Defendant No.1 approached to the Applicant Bank and requested for Term Loan Facility of Rs.8 Lakhs as for lifting of Pipeline and installation of Electrical Motor for Agricultural Development.

¶21

The Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 24.01.2017 granted and disbursed the Term loan amount of Rs.8 Lakhs for as for lifting of Pipeline and installation of Electrical Motor for Agricultural Development.

¶22

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facilities, the defendant has executed loan and security documents on 24.01.2017 as set out in Par No.5.3.2 of the Original Application, in favor of Applicant Bank.

¶23

Defendant No.1 also create a charge of applicant on the land for securing the financial assistance i.e. – All that piece and parcel of property bearing (I) Gat No./Sr.No.216, Hissa No.5 admeasuring about 01H 60R and (II) Gat No./Sr.No.218, Hissa No.1/A/2 admeasuring about 01H 85R lying and situated at village Shetphal, Taluka Karmala, District Solapur, more particularly described in Para. No.5.3.4 of the Original Application.

(OA No.1310/2023)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

The Applicant Bank submits that defendant again approached the applicant bank and requested for Cash Credit Facility of Rs.7 lakhs to the defendant. Defendant No.2 and 3 stood as Guarantor to the said loan facility and thereby Defendant Nos.1 to 3 ready to undertake the personal liability for the due repayment of the amounts standing at the foot of the said loan account.

¶28

The Applicant Bank vide its Sanction Letter dated 21.03.2017 granted and disbursed the Cash Credit Facility of Rs.7 Lakhs for the purpose of working capital requirement, on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein.

¶29

In order to secure the aforesaid Loan facilities, defendant executed loan and security documents on 21.03.2018 as set out in Para No.5.4.2 of Original Application, in favor of the Applicant Bank.

¶30

The Applicant Bank contended that defendants have failed to pay installments in Term Loan account and committed breach of the sanction terms and hence account of the defendant with the applicant bank have become NPA on 21.03.2021 as per Reserve Bank of India norms. Thereafter, the applicant bank issued demand notice dated 17.08.2022 to the defendants through its Advocate Srinivas Y. to pay the remaining outstanding amounts. However, defendant has failed to pay the interest or installments and also failed to regularize the account of the defendant bank with the applicant bank.

¶31

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.1310/2023)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte as per order dated 16.07.2025 passed below Application (Exh-1).

¶36

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-21, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶37

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

¶38

Since the defendant 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.

¶39

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 all the loan facilities, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶40

Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶41

¶42

ORDER

¶43

(A) Original Application No.1310/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶44

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.21,12,147/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Twelve Thousand One Hundred Fourty Seven Only) [ i.e. Rs.11,59,017/- towards Term Loan Account No.

(OA No.1310/2023)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

476606040001758 and Rs.9,53,130/- towards Cash Credit Loan Account No. 476605030000925] with future interest @9%p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.17.07.2023 till payment/ realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶49

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the defendants by mortgaging immovable property i.e. All those piece and parcel of property bearing City Survey No.2400 area admeasuring 175.5 sq. mtrs. situated at Kundal, Taluka Palus, District Sangli, alongwith 1196 sq. ft. construction thereon bearing Grampanchayat Milkat No.697, more particularly described in Schedule-B of the Original Application, more particularly described in Schedule-B of the Original Application

¶50

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

¶51

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶52

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

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

Place : Pune Date: 03.02.2026

¶55

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

¶56

(OA No.1310/2023)

¶57

Page 5 of 5

¶58

[ANIL]

Union Bank of India v. Suryakant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Suryakant

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

State Bank of India versus Dhananjay Solaskar

Federal Bank versus Ramesh Patil

Bank of Maharashtra versus Munir Hodekar

Canara Bank versus Nitin

Bank of Maharashtra versus Anil Ganpat Chavan

Union Bank of India versus Sujit Prabhakar More