Disposed

Bank of Baroda v. Eknath

DRT25 Apr 2026OA/52/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Special Lok Adalat allowed the withdrawal of an Original Application for debt recovery filed by Bank of Baroda. The bank sought a One-Time Settlement of Rs. 17,50,000 in lieu of a claim for Rs. 32,40,687. Subsequent default or agreement led to the withdrawal, granting refund of court fees and return of documents.

What did the court decide?

Allowed withdrawal of OA No. 52 of 2022; court fee to be refunded; original documents to be returned.

Bank of Baroda versus Eknath — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

FO THE C ATI AL At) 1' oR. ANISED oN^{25APRIL.2026 BY THE,} DEBT S REC OVERY^TRIBUN A G AND DIS'IRICT^{I,F],(}ALSERVICE,SAUTTIOITITY}

¶2

OA No.5 2t2022^(Sr.no.l28)

¶3

OA Withdrawal

¶4

Apnlicant(s): Bank 0f^Baroda (hereinafter referred to^as bank^{/ financialinstitution)}

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

D efendant(s) : Eknath^Sonawane (hereinafter referred to^{as / borrower / guarantor(s))}

¶7

Details of disoute /^{claim: The claim of the bank is to the tune of} Rs. 3240687 with^{cost and interest.}

¶8

Thedefendant/shaspaidtheduesinhis/theirloanaccountanamountof Rs. 17,50,000 /-^{(RupeesSevcnteenLakh Fifty Thousand only)as} settlement amount^{under OTS. Therefore, the applicant bankdoes not want to} proceed further. Hence^{presentOriginal Applicationmaybe withdrawnas per} theConsentTerms/Pursisfiledbytheapplicantbankwhichismarkedas.A..

¶9

The request^{for retumof original documentsas per rulesis permitted'} SincethematterisbeforethespecialandNationalLok.Adalat,theCourtFees be refunded to^{the applicant bankas perrules,}

¶10

in view of the above consent^{Terms filed on record /uploadedonline.The} defendant is PresenVabsent^today.

¶11

Applica n

¶12

Dcfcndant(s)

¶13

Advocate for th icant(s) /Authorised Ile ative

¶14

Advocatc for the Defendant(s) /Authoriscd ReP^resentative

¶15

s-1o112(

¶16

Adv. Sanjay NandureMember Spccial and National^{Lok Adalat}

¶17

Shri. M d Adwant C h airm an Special and National^{Lok Adalat}

Date : 25.04.2026

Place : Aurangabad.

oRl) ER/AWARD

Inviewoftheaboveconsenttermswhicharefiledonline/offlineinthe present matter, the order^{is passed. The OA No 5212022 standsdisposed of} accordingly.

¶22

RefundofCourtFeesisallowedasperrules'originaldocumentsbe retumed as per^{DRTProcedure Rules.}

¶23

Dste : 25.04.2026

¶24

(Shri. M n d Adwant) CHAIRMAN Spccial and National^{Lok Adalat}

¶25

¶26

erL'ft

¶27

IN TI{E DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBI.JNAL, AI,JRANGABAD AURANGABAD

O.A No. 52022

BANKOFBARODA

RAHI.JRI BRANCH

RAHURI .......APPLICANT

¶32

v/s

¶33

EKNATII SONWANE .DEFENDANT

¶34

PIJRSIS FOR VITI.IDRAV/AL OF ORIGINAL APPLICATION

¶35

This pursis on behalfofApplicant Bank is as under-

¶36

1 .The Applicant has filed Original Application under OA No 52 of 2022 for

¶37

recovery ofRs 32,40,687 on 261112021.

¶38

2.The Applicant submits thar, the defcodants approached the applicant bank for one time settlement schcmc under Maha Sahyog yojna 2024-25.

¶39

3.The Applicant consid*ed the OTS proposal and accepted ps.17,50,000/-

¶40

[Rs.^{Seveo lakt fifty thousand} onty] Oerefore applicant bank have no

¶41

cause to continue the 0"4,. any further and the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to allow the withrlrawal of the said 0.A. No 52 0f2022 and grant the

¶42

following pmyers of rhc Applicant. Allidavit in support is filed hercwith.

¶43

4 Prayer:

¶44

A)Tlre Hon'ble^{Tribunalbe pleased !o allow} the withdnwal of the said Odginal^{Applicatio4OANo 52022 filed by} rhe Applicant

¶45

B)The^{Applicantmaybe givenliberty to apply for} court fee refimd as per rulcs^{ud retum of origioal documens'}

¶46

¶47

C)Any other ortter in the interest ofjustice in favour^{ofthe Applicant be}

ganted.

Place: Aurangabad

Date:20/042026

I 1

BankolBaroda
B jfifr {-dfGI Oale i 17'0+2026
1
BOB'SARAU
To.
Adv Mrs. ANAG CHIPLUNKAR
Chh Sambhail
Maharashtra
oear slr/Madam'
Mr.
Mr.
Yours Faithfull
e
t
P. SrlYas tava,
Chisf |,.enager' alln gat
ROSARB' Chh Sa

¶54

.8,ffid Pbt^{No: E,} co tn efiq^a-rT{t6dqF 16 /Eruil:^{mEtiffix?ffifr"H5;ll$l} alaurobanroflcarode Stress€d^A56et Sambhalhaga^r{31o

Bank of Baroda v. Eknath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Eknath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Gurjit Kaur

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Baldev Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Baltej Singh

Bank of India versus Pradeep Sharma

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Harjeet Singh Gill

Icici Bank Limited versus Ganesh Petroleum , through Its Proprietor, Yogesh Ganesh Butale