Allowed

Canara Bank v. Namdev Khandekar

DRT17 Feb 2026OA/468/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues totaling Rs.32,93,751/- arising from a term loan. The court held the defendant liable to pay the principal sum and fixed future interest at 9% per annum, upheld the mortgage security on agricultural land, and directed the issue of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant ordered to pay Rs.32,93,751/- plus future interest at 9% p.a.; Recovery Certificate issued; right to sell mortgaged property affirmed.

Canara Bank versus Namdev Khandekar — Insurance | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 31.08.2022 Registered on .. 12.04.2023 Decided on .. 17.02.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--05--17

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 468/2023.

¶3

Canara Bank,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its head office at - 112 JC Road, Bangalore and branch office at Shivram Delux, Shivaji Chowk, Chouphala, Pandharpur, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur 413 304.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Shri Namdev Laxman Khandekar, Age Adult, Occ. Agriculture, R/At and Post Khilarwadi, Taluka Sangola, District Solapur 413 306.

¶8

… Defendant

¶9

Appearances :-

¶10

For Applicant Adv Suraj Renake i/b Adv R.B. Ganbote. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶11

Total Claim Amount – Rs.32,93,751/-

¶12

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 17^th February, 2026)

¶13

Sanap ( OA No. 468/2023 ) 1 of 5

¶14

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.32,93,751/- together with future interest @15.50% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶15

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶16

As per the loan application dated 01.09.2010 of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term loan facility of Rs.8,00,000/- to the defendant for farm development vide Sanction Letter dated 06.09.2010.

¶17

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank. The defendant has also executed simple mortgage deed dated 13.09.2010 in favour of the applicant Bank in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 117/1A admeasuring 1Hector 20Aar at Khilarwadi, Taluka Sangola, District Solapur.

¶18

The defendant has also executed Acknowledgment of Debt and Security in favour of the applicant Bank on 12.10.2013, 19.09.2016, 07.04.2018 and 10.03.2021 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in Term loan account.

¶19

Sanap ( OA No. 468/2023 ) 2 of 5

¶20

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as NonPerforming Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Despite the applicant Bank demanded payment from the defendant by personal visits and telephonically from time to time, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶21

Hence, this application is filed.

¶22

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 01.04.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶23

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Shri Mohan Madhukar Dadas, Senior Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr.Nos.AW-1 to AW-6 along with list (Exh.-7), which corroborates the case of applicant Bank.

¶24

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

¶25

Sanap ( OA No. 468/2023 ) 3 of 5

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @15.50% 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.

¶29

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A} Original Application No. 468/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶32

B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.32,93,751/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakh Ninety Three Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty One only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 31.08.2022 till full

¶33

Sanap ( OA No. 468/2023 ) 4 of 5

¶34

payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶35

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting mortgage in respect of all that piece and parcel of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 117/1A admeasuring 1Hector 20Aar at Khilarwadi, Taluka Sangola, District Solapur, more particularly described in the Para No. 5.7 of the Original Application.

¶36

D} The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶37

E} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶38

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

¶39

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 17.02.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶40

Sanap ( OA No. 468/2023 ) 5 of 5

Canara Bank v. Namdev Khandekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Namdev Khandekar

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 Asha Bhuwad

Ms Vrushali Vinod Kadam versus State Bank Of India

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Allianz Poly Pack Indisutries

Bank of India versus M/s. Lotus Interiors and Decorators

Bank of India versus Uddhav Sudakar Sangle

State Bank of India versus Mr Sachin Mandhare