Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde

DRT4 Jun 2026OA/372/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by Union Bank of India for recovery of dues of Rs. 37,55,979/- along with future interest. The court upheld validity of mortgage charges over agricultural land and directed execution of recovery.

What did the court decide?

Response to repay Rs. 37,55,979/- with 7% simple interest; secured by sale of mortgaged property; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 10.06.2025 Registered on: 24.06.2025 Decided on: 04.06.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 11 24

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 372/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 37,55,979/-

¶4

Union Bank of India,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Registered Office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-40021 & having branches amongst the other places at Vadgaon Gupta, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar, through its POA, Mr. Mohan Bharat Korade (Branch Manager), Age: 35 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o.: Vadgaon Gupta, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar 422605.

… Applicant

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Versus

1. Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Karle Mala, Gajanan Nagar, Post Kedgaon, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar 414001.

¶12

2. Mr. Nilesh Pannalal Katariya, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At 202, Gopaldham Apartment, Tathe Mala, Bhutkarwadi, Savedi, …Defendants Ahmednagar 414003.

¶13

APPEARANCES For the Applicant Mr. Pratik S. Chandiwal Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Delivered on 04.06.2026

¶16

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶17

recovery of a sum of Rs. 37,55,979/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs, Fifty Five Thousand, Nine Hundred and Seventy Nine only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 10.06.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶22

That, the defendant No. 1 had approached to the Applicant bank and requested for financial assistance. Upon considering the request and need of the defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Crop loan of Rs. 7,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 28.10.2015

¶23

on certain terms and conditions.

¶24

Thereafter, the defendant again approached the applicant bank and requested to renew and enhance the above crop loan facility and to sanction a term loan facility. Upon considering the request and need of the defendant, the Applicant Bank enhanced the above Crop loan to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- & sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 7,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 27.10.2016 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest was @ 10.65% & @11.65% p.a. respectively with half yearly rests. The defendant also agreed to pay an additional interest by way of liquidated damages @ 2% p.a. in case of default in repayment.

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including the sanction letters, hypothecation agreement, demand promissory notes, registered mortgage deeds bearing daybook nos. 4959 & 4960 dated 27.10.2016 & 28.10.2016 respectively. Additionally Defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for Defendant No.1 and executed a Deed of Guarantee in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶29

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the Loan sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered mortgage deeds bearing daybook nos. 4959 & 4960 dated 27.10.2016 & 28.10.2016 respectively, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties–

¶30

i) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 3 H 29 R out of Gat No. 358, situated at Village Jeur, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ii) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 1 H 35 R, P.K. 0 H 08 R, out of Gat No. 355, situated at Village Jeur, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

¶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 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 20.03.2022. Therefore on 27.11.2024 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendants through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through paper publication. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 12.03.2026.

¶40

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-04 of Mr. Mohan Bharat Korade, POA of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-22 as per list of documents Exh.05 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶41

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

¶42

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.

¶43

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

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.75% per annum from the date of filing i.e. 10.06.2025 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 @ 7% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶48

ORDER

¶49

(A) Original Application No. 372/2025 is allowed with

¶50

costs.

¶51

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 37,55,979/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lacs, Fifty Five Thousand, Nine Hundred and Seventy Nine only), along with future interest @ 7% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 10.06.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.372/2025)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

documents at Exhibit A-14 & A-15 in list of documents

¶57

Exhibit 5.

¶58

i) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 3 H 29 R out of Gat No. 358, situated at Village Jeur, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

¶59

ii) All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 1 H 35 R, P.K. 0 H 08 R, out of Gat No. 355, situated at Village Jeur, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

¶60

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

¶61

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶62

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

¶63

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶64

(G)

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.04.06.2026

¶67

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶68

(OA No.372/2025)

¶69

Page 8 of 8

¶70

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shri Sawariya Trading Co.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Girish Nandu Kharde

Pallavi Arun Gokhale versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.

Bank of Baroda versus Jyoti Ravindra Gorde

Ms Shilpa Agency versus Central Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Shivrang Agrobase and Allied Products Pvt. Ltd.