Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Punam Enterprises through Its Proprietor Mrs. Punam Matte

DRT22 Apr 2026OA/1349/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues. The court reduced the claim amount by deducting penal interest and modified the future interest rate to 9% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 42,08,509/- plus future interest @ 9% p.a.; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

What the court decided

Hdfc Bank versus Punam Enterprises through Its Proprietor… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 06.12.2022 Registered on .. 20.10.2023 Decided on .. 22.04.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--04--16

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 1349/2023.

¶3

HDFC Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at HDFC Bank House, C.S. No. 6/242, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013 and having one of its office at Department for Special Operations, Peninsula Business Park, B Wing, 4^th Floor, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai 400013.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 M/s. Punam Enterprises, Through its proprietor – Mr. Punam Matte, Age 31 years, Occ. – Business,

¶8

2 Mr. Sandeep Raghunath Matte, Age 42 years, Occ. Business,

¶9

Both having address at Flat No. G-8, Konark Splendor near, Brahma Suncity, Vadgaon Sheri, Pune 411 014. … Defendants

¶10

Sanap ( OA No. 1349/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶11

Appearances :- For Applicant For Defendants

¶12

Advocate Tejashree Hirve. Ex parte.

¶13

Total Claim Amount – Rs.42,89,095/-

¶14

JUDGMENT ( Delivered on 22^nd April, 2026 )

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.42,89,095/- together with future interest @18% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendants.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶17

Defendant No.1, borrower is a retailer of cloths under the name and style as M/s. Punam Enterprises and defendant No.2 is guarantor in his personal capacity. As per the loan application No. 987543 of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the MEOD facility of Rs.15,00,000/- to defendant No.1 for her business requirement purpose vide Sanction Letter dated 24.07.2017. On the request of defendant No.1, the said facility was enhanced to Rs.20,00,000/- as per Sanction Letter dated 26.12.2017. Thereafter, as per request of defendant No.1, the said facility was again enhanced to Rs.30,00,000/- as per Sanction Letter dated 03.08.2018 and it was renewed as per Sanction Letter dated 30.10.2019 and 13.10.2020.

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 1349/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶19

Thereafter, the applicant Bank, after considering request of defendant No.1, sanctioned Term Loan (GECL) of Rs.6,00,000/- to defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 01.09.2020.

¶20

Thereafter, the applicant Bank, after considering request of defendant No.1, sanctioned EEG-WC Term Loan - FITL of Rs.4,25,000/- to defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 21.06.2021.

¶21

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant No.1 has also executed deed of hypothecation in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶22

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 30.04.2022, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. On 19.10.2021, the applicant Bank issued Recall Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶23

Hence, this application is filed.

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 1349/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶25

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 07.11.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶26

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Niraj Surendra Tiwari, Manager and Authorized Signatory of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-46 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

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.

¶30

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.80,586/-, which cannot be granted and the same is

¶31

Sanap ( OA No. 1349/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶32

required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.42,89,095/- is reduced to Rs.42,08,509/-.

¶33

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @18% per annum. 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. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

A} Original Application No. 1349/2023 is allowed with costs. B} Defendant Nos.1 and 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.42,08,509/- (Rupees Forty Two Lakh Eight Thousand Five Hundred Nine only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 06.12.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶36

C} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶37

D} The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 22.04.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 1349/2023 ) 5 of 5

Hdfc Bank v. Punam Enterprises through Its Proprietor Mrs. Punam Matte

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Hdfc Bank v. Punam Enterprises through Its Proprietor Mrs. Punam Matte

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

Canara Bank versus Bhaskar Veer

Bank of Maharashtra versus Nazma

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shambhu Mahadev Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus M/S.Ravindra Shashikant Shah Prop. Mr. Ravindra Shashikant Shah

Canara Bank versus Pravin Sawant

Federal Bank versus Sarjerav