Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shankar

DRT12 Jan 2026OA/1521/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 24,20,147/- after deducting penal interest, directed the respondents to pay the sum along with future simple interest, and issued a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to pay Rs. 24,20,147/- with future interest @ 9% p.a., creation of mortgage on property, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shankar — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 07.11.2022 Registered on: 18.11.2023 Decided on: 12.01.2026 Duration: Y M D 03 02 05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1521/2023.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra ,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitions and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its Head Office at “Lokmangal” 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune-5 and Branch amongst other places at Desai Building, Bazar Peth, Pawas, District Ratnagiri-415 616.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Shankar Narayan Kokare Age adult, Occ.:- Agriculture,

¶8

Mr. Prakash Shankar Salvi Age adult, Occ.:- Agriculture,

¶9

Mr. Sunil Narayan Kokare Age adult, Occ.:- Agriculture,

¶10

Mr. Laxman Baban Jangli Age adult, Occ.:- Agriculture, All R/at Post Golap, Taluka & District Ratnagiri-415 616.

¶11

…Defendants

¶12

APPEARANCES

¶13

For the Applicant Mr. Suraj Renke i/b Mr. R.B.Ganbote - Advocate. For the Defendants Ex-parte.

¶14

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs.25,16,983/-.

(OA No.1521/2023)

Page 1 of 5

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 12^th January 2026)

¶20

Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of sum of Rs.25,16,983/- towards MKCC Loan Account together with future interest thereon at the rate of @12.00% with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till actual realization of amount from the Defendants.

¶21

Brief facts of the application are as under:-

¶22

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 approached the applicant bank in August 2004 for availing MKCC facility of Rs.2,50,000/- to Defendant NO.1. Defendant No.2 and 3 were guarantors for the same. Applicant bank sanctioned MKCC facility of Rs.2.50 lakhs on 17.09.2004 upon certain terms and conditions mentioned therein.

¶23

Defendant No.1 has executed certain security documents on 17.09.2004 in favour of the applicant bank for securing MKCC of Rs.2.50 Lakhs sanctioned to Defendant No.1, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.5 of the Original Application.

¶24

Defendant No.1 created ‘E’ Karar (Declarative Mortgage) on 17.09.2004 for securing the MKCC sanctioned to Defendant No.1 by the applicant bank and accordingly charged the below mentioned property in favour of the applicant bank.

¶25

Description of the property : -

¶26

All that piece and parcel of Gat No.23/9 admeasuring 00H 80Aar assessed at Rs.0.32Ps at village Dhopatwadi, Taluka Ratnagiri, within the limits of Registration District Ratnagiri, Sub Registration District Ratnagiri, District Ratnagiri.

(OA No.1521/2023)

Page 2 of 5

[ANIL]

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 have also executed Balance and Security Confirmation Letter on 23.08.2007 in favour of the applicant bank and confirmed the balance in the MKCC account of defendant No.1 with the applicant bank.

¶31

Defendant Nos.1,3 and 4 approached the applicant bank in or about October 2009 and requested for enhancement in MKCC account of defendant No.1 upto Rs.15,00,000/-. Defendant No.3 and 4 offered themselves as Guarantors for securing of MKCC to be availed by Defendant No.1 from the applicant bank.

¶32

The applicant bank again considered the request of the Defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 and sanctioned MKCC of Rs.15,00,000/- to Defendant No.1 on 03.11.2009, on certain terms and conditions.

¶33

Defendant No.1 has executed certain security documents on 03.11.2009 in favour of the applicant bank for securing MKCC of Rs.15 Lakhs sanctioned to Defendant No.1, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.12 of the Original Application.

¶34

Defendant Nos.1, 3 & 4 have also executed Balance and Security Confirmation Letter on 26.10.2010 in favour of the applicant bank and confirmed the balance in the MKCC account of defendant No.1 with the applicant bank.

¶35

Defendants have also executed balance and security confirmation letter from time to time having executed Guarantee Bond in favour of the applicant bank in MKCC account.

¶36

Applicant Bank states that after availing MKCC, defendant No.1 failed and neglected to pay outstanding amount and comply with the terms and conditions in which the said facilities were granted to

(OA No.1521/2023)

Page 3 of 5

[ANIL]

them. Due to defaults, the Applicant Bank has classified account of defendant No.1 as NPA as per the directions and/or guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. Therefore, the applicant bank is constrained to file this application for recovery of its dues on account of outstanding in the rescheduled account and MKCC account.

¶41

Hence, this application is filed.

¶42

Defendants have failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against them vide Order dated 15.07.2025 passed below the Application (Exh.- 01).

¶43

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of Mr. Gaurav Yashwant Deshpande, Senior Manager & produced on record the Loan Transaction documents (Exh.06) at Exhibits.AW-1 to AW-23, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶44

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

¶45

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.

¶46

The applicant bank has claimed penal interest of Rs.96,836/- in the account, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.25,16,983 is reduced to Rs.24,20,147/-.

¶47

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12% with monthly rests p.a. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if interest @9% p.a. (simple) is granted, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.1521/2023)

Page 4 of 5

[ANIL]

Hence, I pass the following order :-

¶52

ORDER

¶53

(A) Original Application No.1521/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶54

(B) Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 either jointly or severally shall pay an aggregate sum of Rs.24,20,147/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Twenty Thousand One Hundred Fourty Seven only towards MKCC Account with future interest @ 9% p.a. (Simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 07.11.2022 till payment/ realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order, to the Applicant Bank.

¶55

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by creating Mortgage regarding immovable properties i.e.all that piece and parcel of Gat No.23/9 admeasuring 00H 80Aar assessed at Rs.0.32Ps at village Dhopatwadi, Taluka Ratnagiri, within the limits of Registration District Ratnagiri, Sub Registration District Ratnagiri, District Ratnagiri, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.7 of the Original Application.

¶56

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the charged immovable property to recover its dues.

¶57

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶58

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

¶59

Sd/Place : Pune (Dilip G. Murumkar) Date: 12.01.2026 Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶60

(OA No.1521/2023)

¶61

Page 5 of 5

¶62

[ANIL]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shankar

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

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Rajdeep Distributors Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus Bapu Malekar

Punjab National Bank versus Abdul Rauf

Bank of India versus Manohar Balaso Patil

Bank of India versus Dadasaheb Mulik

Punjab National Bank versus Manisha Tilekar