Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Pawanputra Sahakari Thibak Sinchan Yojna Maryadit

DRT26 Mar 2026OA/389/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad allowed an original application filed by Punjab National Bank for recovery of Rs. 86,34,012/ plus future interest against multiple borrowers and guarantors. Being ex-parte, the court accepted unrebutted evidence of loan default, adjusted future interest to 9% p.a., and granted power to sell mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 86,34,012/ with 9% p.a. simple interest; charge over mortgaged properties; Recovery Certificate issued.

Punjab National Bank versus Pawanputra Sahakari… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 27.07.2022 Registered on: 21.09.2022 Decided on: 26.03.2026 Duration: Y M D 03 07 29

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 389/2022

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 86,34,012/-

¶4

Punjab National Bank,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, having its Head Office at Plot No. 4, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075, and one of its Branch Ghogargaon , Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar through its Attorney Mr. Rahul Nathaji Potphode .

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Pawanputra Sahakari Thibak Sinchan Yojana Maryadit, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶9

2. Gorakh Kisan Sathe,

¶10

Age: 51 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 120-3, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 1 of 10

[AMBADAS]

3. Mrs. Radhabai W/o. Kisan Sathe, Through her Legal Heirs, i) Gorakh S/o. Kisan Sathe ii) Mrs. Kamal W/o. Dattatray Jangale, iii) Mrs. Shobha W/o. Vijay Darekar iv) Mrs. Sunita W/o. Subhash Misal R/o.: Gut No. 71, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶15

4. Kashinath Rangnath Wahekar,

¶16

Age: 61 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 122, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶17

5. Santosh Popat Gonde,

¶18

Age: 36 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶19

6. Dagadu Rangnath Wahekar

¶20

Age: 61 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶21

7. Madhav Shivram Sathe

¶22

Age: 41 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶23

8. Mrs. Taramati W/o. Shivram Sathe

¶24

Age: 61 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 120-3, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 2 of 10

[AMBADAS]

9. Uddhav Shivram Sathe Age: 36 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 120-3, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶29

10. Shivram Ranu Sathe, Through his Legal Heirs, i) Mrs. Taramati W/o. Shivram Sathe (Wife) ii) Uddhav S/o. Shivram Sathe (Son) iii) Madhav S/o. Shivram Sathe (Son) iv) Mrs. Usha W/o. Shantaram Kale (Daughter) v) Mrs. Jayashree W/o. Pandurang Kale (Daughter) vi) Mrs. Chhaya W/o. Suresh Gore (Daughter) R/o.: Gut No. 103, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgaon, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar – 413701.

¶30

11) Haribhau Rangnath Wahekar Age: 59 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 122, At Ruikhel, Post Mandavgan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶31

12. Mrs. Kamal W/o. Dattatray Jangale, Age: 51 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 36, Janglewadigavthan, Tal. Srigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar 413701.

¶32

13. Mrs. Shobha W/o. Vijay Darekar Age: 46 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 26, Waluj Tal. Nagar, Dist. Ahmednagar 413716.

¶33

14. Mrs. Sunita W/o. Subvhash Misat Age: 41 years, Occ.: Agriculture, R/o.: 126, At village Hatolan Orangpur, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed – 414202.

…Defendants

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 3 of 10

[AMBADAS]

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶40

Mr. Sameer J. Pande -Advocate Ex-parte

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

Delivered on 29.01.2026

¶43

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 86,34,012/- (Rupees Eighty Six Lacs, Thirty Four Thousand, and Twelve only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 27.07.2022, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶44

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶45

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Term Loan Facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan Facility of Rs. 35,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 05.06.2017 on certain

¶46

terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 4 of 10

[AMBADAS]

loan was @ 16 % p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶51

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, letter of undertaking, registered mortgage deed dated 17.05.2012. Additionally defendant No. 2 to 14 stood as guarantors for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee dated 01.06.2012 in favour of the Applicant Bank

¶52

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants executed mortgage deed dated 17.05.2012 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage

¶53

was created in respect of the following properties:

¶54

Sr. No.	Survey No. of Land of Ruikhel	Area if land in Hectare R	Name of Owner and Possessor of Land	Owner of Land who is Defendant No.
1)	71	2.00	Gorakh Kisan Pawar	Def. No. 2
2)	71	2.56	Radhabai Kisan Sathe	Def. No. 3
3)	91	0.80	Santosh Popat Gonde	Def. No. 5
4)	91	1.67 0.04	Kashinath Rangnath Wahekar	Def. No. 4

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 5 of 10

[AMBADAS]

5)	91	1.66 0.05	Dagadu Rangnath Wahekar	Def. No. 6
6)	91	0.86 0.05	Haribhau Rangnath Wahekar	Def. No. 11
7)	136	3.98	Taramati Shivram Sathe	Def. No. 8
8)	99	075	Shivram Ranu Sathe	Def. No. 10
9)	143	1.01	Madhav Shivram Sathe	Def. No. 7
10)	143	1.01	Uddhav Shivram Sathe	Def. No. 9
11)	96	0.79	Madhav Shivram Sathe	Def. No. 7
12)	96	0.78	Gorakh Sathe, Kamal Jangale, Shobha Darekar, Sunita Misal & Radhabai Sathe	Def. No. 2, 12, 13, 14 & 3
13)	103	0.07	Shivram Ranu Sathe	Def. No. 10
14)	103	0.08	Gorakh Sathe, Kamal Jangale, Shobha Darekar, Sunita Misal & Radhabai Sathe	Def. No. 2, 12, 13, 14 & 3
15)	94/2	0.60 0.04	Gorakh Sathe, Kamal Jangale, Shobha Darekar, Sunita Misal & Radhabai Sathe	Def. No. 2, 12, 13, 14 & 3
16)	439	0.80	Shivram Ranu Sathe	Def. No. 10

¶59

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

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 6 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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. Therefore on 21.04.2022 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.

¶64

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through summons. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 10.11.2023.

¶65

The applicant Bank has filed Evidence Affidavit at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Rahul s/o. Nathaji Potphode, Power of Attorney Holder of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Annexure A-1 to A-29 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 7 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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

¶70

Since the defendants failed to 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.

¶71

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

¶72

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @15% p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 27.07.2022 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), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶73

ORDER

¶74

(A) Original Application No. 389/2022 is allowed with costs.

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 8 of 10

[AMBADAS]

(B) The defendant shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 86,34,012/- (Rupees Eighty Six Lacs, Thirty Four Thousand, and Twelve only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 27.07.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶79

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the immovable properties vide document at Annexure A-14 in list of documents Exh. 5 and details mentioned in para No. 4 of the Judgment.

¶80

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

¶81

(E)

¶82

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

(OA No.389/2022)

Page 9 of 10

[AMBADAS]

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

¶87

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶88

Sd/-

¶89

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.26.03.2026

¶90

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

¶91

(OA No.389/2022)

¶92

Page 10 of 10

¶93

[AMBADAS]

Punjab National Bank v. Pawanputra Sahakari Thibak Sinchan Yojna Maryadit

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Pawanputra Sahakari Thibak Sinchan Yojna Maryadit

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

State Bank of India versus Mr. Ram Jagganath Singare

State Bank of India versus Mr. Gopal Lala Rathod

Canara Bank versus Aditya Enterprises

Idbi Bank versus Bhaskar S/o Maruti Tambe

State Bank of India versus Keshav Tukaram Kendre

Punjab National Bank versus Parmveer Gangadhar Pandule