Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sukhadev Mankar (Deceased)

DRT5 Aug 2026OA/177/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank of Maharashtra filed an original application for recovery of Rs.20,54,354/- from legal heirs of a deceased borrower and other guarantors/mortgagors. Proceeding ex parte, the Tribunal allowed the application, granted future interest at 9% p.a., and ordered sale of mortgaged properties to recover dues.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.20,54,354/- with future interest @9% p.a. from 29.10.2021; mortgaged properties to be sold for recovery; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sukhadev Mankar… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 29.10.2021 Registered on .. 16.02.2023 Decided on .. 05.08.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 04--09--06

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 177/2023.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra, Banking Company Incorporated under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its head office at ―Lokmangal‖, 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411 005 and one of its branch office at – Lonavala, Pune 410 402.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 Smt. Sujata Sukhdev Mankar,

¶7

1A Pratiksha Sukhdev Mankar,

¶8

1B Pratik Sukhdev Mankar, In capacity of legal heirs of deceased Sukhdev Govind Mankar, Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶9

2 Mr. Bharat Govind Mankar, Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶10

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 1 of 7

¶11

3 Ram Govind Mankar, Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶12

4 Mr. Savitra Ram Mankar, Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶13

5 Mrs. Prabha Bharat Mankar Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶14

6 Mr. Govind Dhaklu Mankar Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶15

7 Mr. Shivaji Shankarrao Kale, Add. – At Bhaje, Post Malawali, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶16

… Defendants

¶17

Appearances :-

¶18

For Applicant Advocate M.V. Kini and Co. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶19

Total Claim Amount – Rs.20,54,354/-

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

(Delivered on 05^th August, 2026)

¶22

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.20,54,354/- together with future interest without mentioning any rate of interest till realization of entire amount from the defendants.

¶23

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 2 of 7

¶25

Defendant Nos.1, 1A and 1B are legal heirs of deceased borrower and mortgagor, namely, Sukhdev Govind Mankar who died after availing loan facility from the applicant Bank. Defendant No.1 is also in capacity of guarantor and defendant No.7 is also guarantor for loan facility availed by deceased borrower Sukhdev Mankar, whereas defendant Nos. 2 to 6 are mortgagors for the loan facility availed by deceased Sukhdev.

¶26

As per the request of deceased borrower Sukhdev Mankar, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed Term loan facility of Rs.20,00,000/- to him on 23.08.2014. Defendant Nos.1 and 7 stood guarantors for the repayment of loan availed by deceased.

¶27

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. Defendant Nos. 2 to 6 have also created security interest by way of registered mortgage deed dated 12.09.2014 in favour of the applicant Bank in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 159 area 1H 01.9R; Gat No. 160 area 43.5R, Gat No. 161 area 70.1 R and

¶28

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 3 of 7

¶29

Municipal House No. 376/4 situated at village Devale, Taluka Mawal, District Pune.

¶30

The deceased borrower has also executed Letter of Balance and Security Confirmation on 28.01.2016 and 24.01.2019 in favour of the applicant Bank and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan account.

¶31

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 26.03.2021, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 06.09.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶32

Hence, this application is filed.

¶33

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 15.04.2026 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶34

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Adityakumar Singh, Authorized Signatory

¶35

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 4 of 7

¶36

of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-15 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶37

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

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest without mentioning any rate of interest till the actual realization of the entire amount. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Application till realization of entire dues from the defendants, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶41

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 5 of 7

¶42

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶43

O R D E R

¶44

A} Original Application No. 177/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶45

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 7 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.20,54,354/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Fifty Four Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Four only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 29.10.2021 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶46

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 159 area 1H 01.9R; Gat No. 160 area 43.5R, Gat No. 161 area 70.1 R and Municipal House No. 376/4 situated at village Devale, Taluka Mawal, District Pune, more particularly described in the Schedule B of the Original Application.

¶47

D} The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶48

E} The liability of defendant Nos.1A and 1B is restricted to the extent of estate inherited by them from deceased Sukhdev Govind Mankar.

¶49

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 6 of 7

¶50

F} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶51

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

¶52

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 05.08.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶53

Sanap ( OA No. 177/2023 ) 7 of 7

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sukhadev Mankar (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Sukhadev Mankar (Deceased)

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

Uco Bank versus Popat Patil

Bank of India versus Swapnali Desai

Ms Shivtara Properties Pvt. Ltd. versus Indian Bank

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Spd Cold Storage LLP a Limited Liability Partnership Firm

Bank of India versus Siddheshwar Londhe

Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited versus Rajyog Tradelinks