Allowed

Idbi Bank v. M/s. Sahara Sheti Udyog

DRT13 Mar 2026OA/399/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the recovery application filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. against three defendants. The bank successfully claimed recovery of a loan amount along with future interest, while the tribunal adjusted the future interest rate to 9% simple per annum just and reasonable. The order includes directions for the sale of mortgaged properties to recover dues.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 45,38,968/- plus future interest at 9% p.a. simple from 15.07.2022. Issuance of Recovery Certificate. Authorization to sell mortgaged properties.

Idbi Bank versus M/s. Sahara Sheti Udyog — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 15.07.2022 Registered on: 10.10.2022 Decided on: 13.03.2026 Duration: Y M D 03 07 26

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD

¶3

(Before Shri Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer)

¶4

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 399/2022

¶5

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 45,38,968/-

¶6

IDBI BANK LTD.,

¶7

A company incorporated under the

¶8

Companies Act, 1956, and a company within the meaning of Section 2 (20) of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) and a banking company duly registered, within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and having its registered office at IDBI Tower, World Trade Centre, Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005 and through one of its

… Applicant

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 1 of 11

[Ambadas]

Branch at Gangapur, At. House No. 113, Godavari Colony, Aurangabad Road, Lasur Naka, Gangapur, Post & Tq. Gangapur, & Dist. Aurangabad Maharashtra. Through its Authorised Signatory and Branch Head, Mr. Sumit S/o. Vijaykumar Rodge, Age: 38 Years, Occ: Service. Present R/o. Aurangabad.

¶14

Versus

¶15

M/s. Sahara Sheti Udyog, … Defendants Prop: Ramnath Karbhari Barase,

¶16

Age: Major, Occ: Agri/Business, R/o: At. Lasur Nakar, Main Road Aurangabad, Tq. Gangapur,

¶17

Dist: Aurangabad.

¶18

Mr. Krishna Pandurang Darunte,

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 2 of 11

[Ambadas]

Age: Major, Occ: Agri,

¶23

R/o: Muddesh Wadgaon, Tq. Gangapur,

¶24

Dist. Aurangabad.

¶25

Mr. Kapil Pralhad Dahitule,

¶26

Age: Major, Occ: Agri,

¶27

R/o: At. Post: Kaigaon, Tq. Gangapur,

¶28

Dist. Aurangabad.

¶29

APPEARANCES

¶30

For the Applicant Mr. Pathak Anirudha S- Advocate For the Defendant No. 1 Mr. R. D. Sakhre- Advocate For the Defendant No. 2 Mr. A.K. Shingare-Advocate For the Defendant No. 3 Ex-parte

¶31

J U D G M E N T Delivered on (13.03.2026)

¶32

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs. 45,38,968/- (Rs. Forty-Five Lakhs, Thirty-Eight Thousand, Nine Hundred and Sixty-Eight Only)

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 3 of 11

[Ambadas]

together with interest @11.10% p.a. with monthly rests upon Term Loan and FITL Account from 06.04.2022 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the Defendants.

¶37

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶38

That the Defendants approached the Applicant Bank and requested for the sanction of a Cash Credit Loan Facility. Upon considering the Defendant’s representation, request, and financial needs, the Applicant Bank sanctioned to Defendant No. 1, a Cash Credit Loan Limit of Rs. 35,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 23.02.2015. The Defendant No. 1 executed and delivered a Demand Promissory Note dated 09.08.2017 for Rs. 35,10,000/- in favour of the Applicant Bank. The Applicant submits that the said Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 35,00,000/- was renewed vide sanction letter dated 22.08.2017. The Applicant Bank again renewed the said Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 35,00,000/- in the year 2020 and issued a renewal sanction letter dated 05.05.2020, on certain terms & conditions.

¶39

The agreed rate of interest for the Cash Credit Loan Limit was

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 4 of 11

[Ambadas]

@10.25% per annum with monthly rests.

¶44

In order to secure the aforesaid Cash Credit Loan facility, the Defendants executed loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank namely sanction letter, demand promissory note, request letter, hypothecation agreement, letter of undertaking, equitable mortgage etc.

¶45

The Defendant No. 1 is the principal borrower and Defendant Nos. 2 & 3 are the guarantors of the said loan facility. Further the Defendant No. 1 executed Registered Mortgaged Deed bearing Day Book No. GGP-745/2015 dated 25.02.2015 of the following properties in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶46

1. All the piece and parcels of immovable property i.e.

¶47

Plot No. 20 & 21, admeasuring area 4144.56 Sq. Ft in

¶48

Gut No. 42/Part, situated at Karodi, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. Standing in the Name of Defendant No. 1

¶49

(Mr. Ramnath Karbhari Barase) which bounded as under:-

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 5 of 11

[Ambadas]

East :- Plot No. 18 & 19, West :- Plot No. 22, South :- 9. M. W. Road, North :- Plot No. 23.

¶54

1. All that piece and parcels of the immovable property i.e. House Milkat No. 325, admeasuring area 101.31 Sq. Mtrs. In Ward No. 11, situated at Gangapur, Tq. Gangapur & Dist. Aurangabad. Standing in the name of Defendant No. 2 (Mr. Krushna Pandurang Darunte) which bounded as under:East :- 10 Feet wide Road, West :- Jay Yogeshwar Society, South :- House of Wagh, North :- Land of Taji.

¶55

The Applicant Bank further contended that the Defendants failed to keep their promises and commitments agreed by them with regard to the 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

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 6 of 11

[Ambadas]

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. Therefore on 04.09.2021, the Applicant Bank issued Demand Notice to the Defendants through their Advocate. Despite service of Notice, the Defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the Applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶60

Advocate R. D. Sakhre has appeared for the Defendant No. 1 and filed his Vakalatnama. Despite giving sufficient opportunities, Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have not filed their Written Statement. The right of Defendants to file the Written Statement stands closed vide Order dated 07.03.2024. Despite service, the Defendant No. 3 has not appeared and therefore, Defendant was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 07.03.2024.

¶61

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Sumit S/o Vijaykumar Rodge, AGM of the Applicant Bank and has produced on record the original loan

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 7 of 11

[Ambadas]

transaction documents as Annex. A-1 to A-16 along-with list of documents Exh.5, which corroborates the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶66

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

¶67

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.

¶68

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest at @11.10% per annum with monthly rests from 06.04.2022 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the Defendants. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that awarding future interest at @9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable.

¶69

Hence, I pass the following order.

ORDER

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 8 of 11

[Ambadas]

(A) Original Application No. 399/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶75

(B) The Defendants shall pay Jointly and Severally to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 45,38,968/- (Rs. Forty-Five Lakhs, Thirty-Eight Thousand, Nine Hundred and SixtyEight Only) along-with future interest at @9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 15.07.2022, till full payment/ realization of the said amount.

¶76

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by mortgage of immovable property in favour of the Applicant Bank vide document as Annex. A-6 in list of document Exh.5. The mortgaged properties are described as follows:

¶77

1. All the piece and parcels of immovable property i.e. Plot No. 20 & 21, admeasuring area 4144.56 Sq. Ft

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 9 of 11

[Ambadas]

in Gut No. 42/Part, situated at Karodi, Tq. &

¶82

Dist. Aurangabad. Standing in the Name of

¶83

Defendant No. 1 (Mr. Ramnath Karbhari Barase)

¶84

which bounded as under:-

¶85

East :- Plot No. 18 & 19, West :- Plot No. 22, South :- 9. M. W. Road,

¶86

North :- Plot No. 23.

¶87

1. All that piece and parcels of the immovable

¶88

Property i.e. House Milkat No. 325, admeasuring

¶89

area 101.31 Sq. Mtrs. in Ward No. 11, situated at Gangapur, Tq. Gangapur & Dist. Aurangabad.

¶90

Standing in the name of Defendant No. 2

¶91

(Mr. Krushna Pandurang Darunte) which bounded as under:-

¶92

East :- 10 Feet wide Road, West :- Jay Yogeshwar Society,

(OA No.399-2022)

Page 10 of 11

[Ambadas]

South :- House of Wagh,

¶97

North :- Land of Taji.

¶98

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and hypothecated

¶99

articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶100

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶101

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

¶102

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶103

Sd/-

¶104

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place : Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date : 13.03.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶105

(OA No.399-2022)

¶106

Page 11 of 11

¶107

[Ambadas]

Idbi Bank v. M/s. Sahara Sheti Udyog

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. M/s. Sahara Sheti Udyog

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Govind Waman Turkunde

Union Bank of India versus Mahadev Abaji Kaigude

Canara Bank versus Suryakant Chokhaji Dolse (Deceased)

Idbi Bank versus Sau. Alka Kisan Kale

Punjab National Bank versus Baban Rangnath Pawar

Bank of Maharashtra versus Pradeep Ravindra Borhade