Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Mauli Agriclinic and Business Centre

DRT6 Jan 2026OA/360/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed Canara Bank's recovery application against M/s. Mauli Agriclinic and partners. The court directed respondents to pay the outstanding principal along with future interest at 9% p.a., secured by the sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 79,71,953/- with future interest at 9% p.a.; mortgage properties listed for sale to recover dues; Recovery Certificate issued.

Canara Bank versus M/S Mauli Agriclinic and Business Centre — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 18.04.2022 Registered on: 25.08.2022 Decided on: 06.01.2026 Duration: Y M D 03 08 18

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 360/2022

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 79,71,953/-

¶4

CANARA BANK,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking

¶6

companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings)

¶7

Act, 1970, having its Head Office at 112 JC Road, Bangalore in the State of Karnataka and one of its

¶8

branch offices amongst other places at Main Road

¶9

Shrigonda, Taluka - Shrigonda, District-Ahmednagar.

¶10

Through its Power of Attorney Holder, Shri. Kedareshwar Mohapatra.

¶11

… Applicant

¶12

Versus

¶13

1. M/s. Mauli Agriclinic & Business Centre A Partnership Firrm At Mandavgaon Road, Jodhpur Maruti Chowk, Tal. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413 701.

[AMBADAS]

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 1 of 10

2. Shri. Ramesh Sakharam Hive, Adult, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: Khetmaliswadi Tal. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413 701.

¶18

3. Smt. Rupali Hirve, Adult, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: Khetmaliswadi, Tal. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413 701.

¶19

…Defendants

¶20

APPEARANCES

¶21

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶22

Mr. G. A. Rajput -Advocate Ex-parte

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Delivered on 06.01.2026

¶25

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 79,71,953/- (Rupees Seventy Nine Lacs, Seventy One Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifty Three only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 18.04.2022, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶26

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 through its partners i.e. defendant No.2 and 3 approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Cash Credit facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Cash Credit facility of Rs. 51,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 09.03.2018 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @9.95% p.a. with half yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶31

Furthermore, it is submitted that the defendant No. 1 through its partners i.e. defendant No.2 and 3 approached the applicant bank and requested the renewal of the Cash Credit facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank renewed the Cash Credit facility vide sanction letter dated 11.06.2020 on certain terms and conditions.

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

Subsequently, it is submitted that the defendant No. 1 through its partners i.e. defendant No.2 and 3 approached to grant GECL loan facility and WCDL loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the GECL loan facility of Rs. 10,00,000/- & WCDL loan facility of Rs. 5,10,000/- on certain terms and conditions.

¶36

The applicant bank further states that the defendant No. 1 has again requested the applicant bank to grant the Kisan OD Loan Facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Kisan OD Loan Facility of Rs. 8,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 05.10.2013 on certain terms and conditions.

¶37

That the applicant bank due to non-servicing of the interest of the defendant, opened COVID FITL Account on time and to save defendant No. 1 account from slipping to NPA as per applicant

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

bank scheme, defendant No. 1 have been facilitated with FITL

¶42

(Funded Interest Term Loan) of an amount of Rs. 2,32,438/-

¶43

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, renewal letters, registered mortgage deed bearing daybook nos. 954/2018 & 1683/2020 etc., Additionally Defendant No. 2 & 3 stood as guarantors for defendant No. 1 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶44

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered mortgage deed bearing daybook nos. 954/2018 & 1683/2020 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶45

A) All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 5 H. No.: 2W6002377 (Old House No. 6877), admeasuring 494 sq. meter situated at 844/2/A, within, Shrigonda Municipal Council Limit, Shrigonda, Ahmednagar, 413 701, which is bounded as under:

¶46

East: Remaining Portion of Gut No. 864, South: Shrigonda-Ahmednagar Road, West: Plot Noo.4, Gut No. 844/2/A,

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

North: Plot No. 6 and 7, Gut No. 844/2/A.

¶51

B) All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 6 H. No.: 2W6002370 (Old House No. 68897), admeasuring 296 sq. meter situated at 844/2/A, within, Shrigonda Municipal Council Limit, Shrigonda, Ahmednagar, 413 701, which is bounded as under:

¶52

East: Remaining Portion of Gut No. 864, South: Plot No. 5, Gut No. 844/2/2, West: Plot No.4, Gut No. 844/2/A, North: 9 Mtr. Road.

¶53

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed rate of interest as per terms and conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter, the applicant bank repeatedly made demand of loan amount and called upon the defendants to pay with the agreed rate of interest thereon, but the defendants failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 02.05.2021. Therefore, on 27.03.2022 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶58

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through court commissioner. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 12.02.2025.

¶59

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Kedareshwar Mohapatra S/o Mohan Sunder Mohapatra, Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A- 36 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶60

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

¶61

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable properties of the borrowers which are mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶66

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest at contractual ratess from the date of filing i.e. 18.04.2022 of this application till realization of the claim amount. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 9% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶67

ORDER

¶68

(A) Original Application No. 360/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶69

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 79,71,953/- (Rupees Seventy Nine Lacs, Seventy One Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifty Three only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 18.04.2022

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶74

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties vide documents at Exh. A-10 & A-31 in list of documents Exh.

¶75

¶76

A) All that piece and parcel of Plot No. 5 H. No.: 2W6002377 (Old House No. 6877), admeasuring 494 sq. meter situated at 844/2/A, within, Shrigonda Municipal Council Limit, Shrigonda, Ahmednagar, 413 701, which is bounded as under:

¶77

East: Remaining Portion of Gut No. 864, South: Shrigonda-Ahmednagar Road, West: Plot Noo.4, Gut No. 844/2/A, North: Plot No. 6 and 7, Gut No. 844/2/A.

¶78

¶79

East: Remaining Portion of Gut No. 864, South: Plot No. 5, Gut No. 844/2/2, West: Plot No.4, Gut No. 844/2/A, North: 9 Mtr. Road.

(OA No.360/2022)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/ goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶84

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶85

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

¶86

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶87

Sd/-

¶88

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.06.01.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶89

(OA No.360/2022)

¶90

Page 10 of 10

¶91

[AMBADAS]

Canara Bank v. M/S Mauli Agriclinic and Business Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Mauli Agriclinic and Business Centre

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 Tarachand Rakhmaji Argade (Deceased)

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Shubham Sunil Patil

Bank of Maharashtra versus Madhukar Laxman Borade (Deceased)

Union Bank of India versus Mahesh Dnyandeo Dhavale

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Kamalakar Krushi Seva Kendra

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus M/S Ganesh Agro Industries