Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Sanjay Trading Company Prop Sanjay Sopan Ursal

DRT10 Jun 2026OA/45/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's application for recovery of Rs. 38,23,260/- against two defendants. The court modified the claimed future interest rate to 9% per annum and issued a Recovery Certificate since the defendants appeared ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Defendants shall pay Rs. 38,23,260/- along with future interest @9% p.a. from 26.04.2021; Recovery Certificate is issued.

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Sanjay Trading Company… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 26.04.2021 Registered on .. 11.01.2022 Decided on .. 10.06.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 05--01--14

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE ( Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer ) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 45/2022.

¶3

Bank of Baroda,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted by the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its Head Office at Baroda House, Mandvi, Baroda - 390 006 and having its one of branch at – Gultekdi, Pune.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1 M/s. Sanjay Trading Company, Proprietor Sanjay Sopan Ursal, Address - Shop No. 330, Fruit Lane, Market Yard, Pune 411 037.

¶8

2 Mr. Nilesh Y. Shinde, Address – 2023, Sadashiv Peth, Near S.P. College, Tilak Road, Pune 411030. … Defendants

¶9

Appearances :-

¶10

For Applicant Advocate Pooja Mali i/b M.V. Kini & Co. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶11

Total Claim Amount – Rs.38,23,260/-

¶12

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2022 ) 1 of 5

¶13

JUDGMENT ( Delivered on 10^th June, 2026 )

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.38,23,260/- together with future interest @9.60% per annum for Cash Credit facility and @12.80% per annum for Ad hoc Cash Credit facility till realization of the entire amount from the defendants.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit facility of Rs.7,50,000/- to defendant No.1 for working capital vide Sanction Letter dated 28.01.2012. Thereafter, as per request of defendant No.1, the cash credit facility was enhanced to Rs.12,50,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 08.01.2014 and again enhanced to Rs.24,50,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 07.07.2015 and the same was reviewed on 20.03.2017. Defendant No.2 stood guarantor for the repayment of said facility availed by defendant No.1.

¶17

Defendant No.1 again approached the applicant Bank for availing Ad hoc Cash Credit facility of Rs.10,00,000/- and the same was granted to defendant No.1 vide Sanction Letter dated 06.01.2017 and as per request of defendant No. 1, the same was enhanced to

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2022 ) 2 of 5

¶19

Rs.15,00,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 11.01.2018. Defendant No.2 stood guarantor for the repayment of said facility availed by defendant No.1.

¶20

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with deed of hypothecation. The defendants have also executed Letter of Acknowledgment of Debt on 12.07.2019 in favour of the applicant Bank and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan accounts.

¶21

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 09.09.2018, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendants as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 25.03.2021, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. Despite service of Notice, the defendants failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶22

Hence, this application is filed.

¶23

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte

¶24

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2022 ) 3 of 5

¶25

against the defendants as per Order dated 26.02.2026 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶26

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Shekhawat Narpat Singh, Senior Manager and Authorized Signatory of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW1-1 to AW1-35 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶27

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

¶28

Since the defendants 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.

¶29

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.

¶30

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @9.60% per annum for Cash Credit facility and @12.80% per annum for Ad hoc Cash Credit facility. However,

¶31

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2022 ) 4 of 5

¶32

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.

¶33

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

A} Original Application No. 45/2022 is allowed with costs. B} Defendant Nos.1 and 2 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.38,23,260/(Rupees Thirty Eight Lakh Twenty Three Thousand Two Hundred Sixty only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.04.2021 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 defendants.

¶38

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 10.06.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶39

Sanap ( OA No. 45/2022 ) 5 of 5

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Sanjay Trading Company Prop Sanjay Sopan Ursal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. M/S Sanjay Trading Company Prop Sanjay Sopan Ursal

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 Shyambabu

Union Bank of India versus Sadhu

Siddhanath Collection through its proprietor Jitendra v Waghmode versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus Deepak Kadam

Canara Bank versus M/S R K Poultries Pvt. Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Shaikh Salauddin