Allowed

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. M/S Ganesh Agro Industries

DRT6 Jan 2026OA/42/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application filed by a Scheduled Commercial Bank for the recovery of ₹33,31,154/- and future interest from defendants (borrowers and guarantors) who failed to repay sanctioned loans and remained an NPA account, the Debts Recovery Tribunal proceeded ex-parte on defendants' non-appearance.

What did the court decide?

Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay ₹33,31,154/- plus future interest @9% p.a. from 31.03.2023; recovery certificate issued permitting sale of mortgaged property.

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus M/S Ganesh Agro… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 31.03.2023 Registered on: 18.01.2024 Decided on: 06.01.2026 Duration: Y M D 02 09 06

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 42/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 33,31,154/-

¶4

Maharashtra Gramin Bank ,

¶5

A Scheduled Commercial Bank Constituted under Section 3 of the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 and also a Banking Company under Section 5 © of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) having its Head Office at Plot No. 42, Gat No. 33, Golwadi, Growth Centre, Waluj Mahanagar-IV, CIDCO, Aurangabad and having its Branch at Nachanvel, Tq. Kanad, Dist. Aurangabad, through its Branch Manager and Principal Officer Shri. Jaypal S/o Devchand Rau.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. M/s. Ganesh Agro Industries Prop. Shri. Babasaheb S/o. Bhimrao Jangale At & Post Sarola, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad.

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

02 Shri. Navnatth S/o. Ashok Jangale At & Post Sarola, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad.

¶13

3. Shri. Gopinath S/o. Tukaram Lenekar, At & Post Sarola, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad.

¶14

…Defendants

¶15

APPEARANCES

¶16

Mr. J. R. Kalyankar -Advocate Ex-parte

¶17

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Delivered on 06.01.2026

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 33,31,154/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs, Thirty One Thousand, One Hundred and Fifty Four only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 31.03.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶21

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Term Loan Facility, Cash Credit Facility and Working Capital Term loan under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan Facility of Rs. 13,50,000/- vide sanction letter dated 28.06.2019, Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 9,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 25.10.2019 & Cash Credit Facility and Working Capital Term loan under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme of Rs. 4,20,000/- on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan facilities was @ 11.50%, @ 11.50% & @ 9.25% p.a. respectively with monthly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶26

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank.

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

These included sanction letters, demand promissory notes,

¶31

composite deeds of simple mortgage, request letter, simple

¶32

mortgage deeds dated 13.06.2019 & 10.09.2020 etc., Additionally defendant No. 2 & 3 stood as guarantors for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee in favour of the applicant bank.

¶33

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the

¶34

aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant created first charge over his immovable property by executing simple mortgage deeds dated 13.06.2019 & 10.09.2020. The mortgage was created in respect of

¶35

the following property:

¶36

All that piece and parcel of land in Gut no. 26, admeasuring 1.20 hectare, situated at Sarola, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad which is bounded as under:

¶37

North: Brook, East: Land of Bhagwan Jangale, West: Land of Ashok Jangale, South: Land of Budhan Pathan.

¶38

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard

¶39

to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 03.06.2021. Therefore on 09.03.2023 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.

¶44

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were duly served. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 29.05.2025.

¶45

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Shri. Jaypal S/o. Devchand Raut, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Annexure A-1 to A-46 along with list of

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶50

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

¶51

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.

¶52

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

¶53

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 9.25 % p.a. from the date of filing i.e. 31.03.2023 of this application on outstanding amount 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) on outstanding amount it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 42/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶59

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 33,31,154/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs, Thirty One Thousand, One Hundred and Fifty Four only), along with future interest @9 % per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 31.03.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶60

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

¶61

All that piece and parcel of land in Gut no. 26, admeasuring 1.20 hectare, situated at Sarola, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad which is bounded as under: North: Brook, East: Land of Bhagwan Jangale, West: Land of Ashok Jangale, South: Land of Budhan Pathan.

(OA No 42/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶66

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶67

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

¶68

(G) File be consigned to the record room

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:. 06.01.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶71

(OA No 42/2024)

¶72

Page 8 of 8

¶73

[AMBADAS]

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. M/S Ganesh Agro Industries

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharastra Gramin Bank v. M/S Ganesh Agro Industries

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 Tarachand Rakhmaji Argade (Deceased)

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Shubham Sunil Patil

Bank of Maharashtra versus Madhukar Laxman Borade (Deceased)

Union Bank of India versus Mahesh Dnyandeo Dhavale

Union Bank of India versus M/S. Kamalakar Krushi Seva Kendra

State Bank of India versus Mr. Youraj Ashok Taksal