Allowed

Hdfc Bank v. Siddhraj Textiles Prop. Mr. Surendra Diwate

DRT16 Apr 2026OA/416/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank’s ex-parte original application for recovery of loan dues. After deducting penal interest, the bank was awarded the principal sum with future interest at 9% per annum and direction to issue a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 11,33,380/- along with future interest @ 9% p.a. from 11.05.2018; issue Recovery Certificate.

Hdfc Bank versus Siddhraj Textiles Prop. Mr. Surendra Diwate — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 11.05.2018 Registered on .. 12.04.2023 Decided on .. 16.04.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 07--11--05

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 416/2023.

¶3

HDFC Bank Limited,

¶4

A Banking Company within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 incorporated and duly registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at HDFC Bank House, C.S. No. 6/242, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai and branch at – Venkatesh Senate, 640, Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil Chowk, Sangli-Miraj Road, Sangli 416 416

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s. Siddhraj Textiles, Through its proprietor Mr. Surendra Diwate,

¶8

424 3 Salsinge Road Vita, Taluka Khanpur, District Sangli 41531.

¶9

… Defendant

¶10

Appearances :-

¶11

For Applicant Advocate Abhay Nevagi. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶12

Sanap ( OA No. 416/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶13

Total Claim Amount – Rs.11,86,382/-

¶14

JUDGMENT ( Delivered on 16^th April, 2026 )

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.11,86,382/- together with future interest @11.25% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶17

The defendant M/s. Siddhraj Textiles, through its proprietor Mr. Surendra Diwate indulged in manufacturing of Gray Clothes on power looms. As per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit facility of Rs.10,00,000/- for working capital requirement to the defendant vide Sanction Letter dated 30.11.2013.

¶18

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with letter of hypothecation dated 06.12.2013.

¶19

Further, as per request of the defendant, the applicant Bank renewed the credit facility vide Sanction Letter dated 21.11.2015.

¶20

Sanap ( OA No. 416/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶21

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 29.06.2017, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 17.04.2018, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶22

Hence, this application is filed.

¶23

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 06.06.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶24

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Neeraj Tiwari, Authorized Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-13 along with list (Exhibit 10), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶25

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

¶26

Sanap ( OA No. 416/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed description with respect to the hypothecated assets, therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶29

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.53,002/-, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.11,86,382/- is reduced to Rs.11,33,380/-.

¶30

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.25% per annum. 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.

¶31

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

A} Original Application No. 416/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶34

Sanap ( OA No. 416/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶35

B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.11,33,380/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Thirty Three Thousand Three Hundred Eighty only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 11.05.2018 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶36

C} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶37

D} The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendant.

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 16.04.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 416/2023 ) 5 of 5

Hdfc Bank v. Siddhraj Textiles Prop. Mr. Surendra Diwate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Siddhraj Textiles Prop. Mr. Surendra Diwate

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 Ms Suyog Groundnut and Oil Mill Prop. Bhanudas Raghunath Bagav

Union Bank of India versus Sonali

Bank of Baroda versus Mahavir Bhore

Bank of Maharashtra versus Satish

Union Bank of India versus Ms Shambhu Mahadev Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Nazma