Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Venkatesh Cattle Feed Industries

DRT11 Jun 2026OA/367/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of loan dues of Rs. 40,31,033/- from borrowers who failed to repay a term loan and cash credit facility. The court granted future interest at 10% p.a. against the claimant's request for 12% and ordered enforcement of the mortgage.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 40,31,033/- plus future interest at 10% p.a. from date of application; mortgage property secured; recovery certificate to be issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. Venkatesh Cattle Feed Industries — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 07.05.2025 Registered on: 21.06.2025 Decided on: 11.06.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 01 04

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 367/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 40,31,033/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra, A Body Corporate and constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition of Undertaking) Act, 5 of 1970, carrying on Banking Business and having its Head Office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 005 and Zonal Office at Second Floor, Laltaki Road, Ahmednagar-414005. Branch at Shevgaon, Tal. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. Through its Authorized Officer, Shri. Avinash Shivajirao Mate, Age: Major, Occ.: Service, Working as Senior Manager, Branch at Shevgaon, Tal. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar.

… Applicant

Versus

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

1. M/s. Venkatesh Cattle Feed Industries, Through its Proprietor, Archana Kishor Raut, Age: Major, Occ.: Business, Address: At Samarth Nagar, Paithan Road, Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar 414502.

¶11

2. Kishor Ashok Raut

¶12

Age: Major, Occ.: Business, Address: At Samarth Nagar, Paithan Road, Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar 414502. …Defendants

¶13

Ahmednagar.

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶16

Mr. Atul A. Mishra -Advocate Ex-parte

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Delivered on 11.06.2026

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 40,31,033/- (Rupees Forty Lacs, Thirty One Thousand, and Thirty Three only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 07.05.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶24

The applicant bank states that Defendant No. 1 approached the applicant bank seeking financial assistance. Upon scrutiny of the submitted documents, the applicant Bank Sanctioned Term Loan Facility of Rs. 38,32,000/- & Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 4,50,000/vide sanction letter dated 27.09.2023. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facilities was @9% & @10.35% p.a. respectively with monthly rests. The defendant also agreed to pay an additional interest by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶25

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, demand promissory note, registration mortgage bearing per daybook No. 4368/2023 & Correction Deed bearing daybook No. 4367/2023 dated 28.09.2023 etc., Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee dated 30.09.2023 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶30

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed registered simple mortgage bearing per daybook No. 4368/2023 & Correction Deed

¶31

bearing daybook No. 4367/2023 dated 28.09.2023 in respect of

¶32

following property:

¶33

All that piece and parcel of Gut No. 307/1/2 (P), Admeasuring 0.04 H, Situated at Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under:

¶34

North: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) East: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) West: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) South: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P).

¶35

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

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 defendant became irregular and classified as NPA on 08.11.2024. Therefore, on 11.12.2024 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶40

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded as ex-parte as per Order dated 05.05.2026.

¶41

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Avinash Shivajirao Mate, Chief Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. AW-1(1) to AW-1(17) along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶46

Since the defendants failed to appear and did not 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.

¶47

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over immovable property of the borrower which is mortgaged in favour of the applicant bank.

¶48

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 12% p.a. with monthly rests on the aforesaid loan facility from the date of filing i.e. 07.05.2025 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 @ 10% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 367/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶54

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 40,31,033/- (Rupees Forty Lacs, Thirty One Thousand, and Thirty Three only), along with future interest @ 10% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 07.05.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶55

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties vide document at Exh. AW-1(6) in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶56

All that piece and parcel of Gut No. 307/1/2 (P), Admeasuring 0.04 H, Situated at Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: North: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) East: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) West: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P) South: Gat No. 307/1/2 (P).

(OA No.367/2025)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property and hypothecated articles/goods

¶61

etc., to recover its dues.

¶62

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶63

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

¶64

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.11.06.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶67

(OA No.367/2025)

¶68

Page 8 of 8

¶69

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Venkatesh Cattle Feed Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. M/s. Venkatesh Cattle Feed Industries

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Maruti Mhatarba Kadam

Bank of India versus Mr. Sudhakar Balu Shinde

Bank of India versus Mr. Vishal Rajendra Vazarkar

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/s. Riddhi Siddhi Trading Company

Bank of Maharashtra versus Gajendra Sharadchanda Takate

Axis Bank versus Sandip Appasaheb Dudhale