Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Deepak Kadam

DRT11 Jun 2026OA/589/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of unpaid loans and interest. The court admitted evidence ex-parte due to non-appearance of respondents, quantified the claim by deducting unjustified penal interest, and directed payment of principal amounts with future simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of principal dues totaling approx. Rs. 18.5 Lakhs from specific respondents with future simple interest; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Deepak Kadam — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 19.03.2022 Registered on .. 23.06.2022 Decided on .. 11.06.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 04--02--22

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 589/2022.

¶3

Bank of Maharashtra, Banking Company Incorporated under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970, having its head office at ―Lokmangal‖, 1501, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411 005 and one of its branch office at – Kudal, Pune.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

1 Deepak Dnyandeo Kadam Age - Adult, Occ. – Business, a) Flat No. 4, Durgadeep Complex, Peerwadi, Gorakhpur, Satara 415 001. b) Shreenath Society, 1^st Floor, Sainik School Compound, Peerwadi, Satara 415 003.

¶7

2 Manoj Bapurao Yadav, Age - Adult, Occ. – Business, R/at : Plot No. 9, Ashirwad Colony, Near Amarlaxmi, Degaon Road, MIDC, Satara 415 004.

¶8

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 1 of 9

¶9

3 Santosh Ashok Chinchkar, Age - Adult, Occ. – Business, R/at : 223/5, Guruwar Peth, Satara 415 110.

¶10

4 Sandesh Vasantrao Gavali, Age - Adult, Occ. – Business, R/at : Plot No. 8, Kanchan Nagar, Bhigwan Road, Post Baramati, Taluka Baramati, District Pune 413 133. … Defendants

¶11

Appearances :-

¶12

For Applicant Advocate V.S. Tokekar. For Defendants Ex parte.

¶13

Total Claim Amount – Rs.22,63,751=56

¶14

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 11^th June, 2026)

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.22,63,751=56 together with future interest for Cash Credit @14.50% per annum, for three Term Loans @14%, 15% and 10.75% per annum respectively and for MKCC @7% per annum from the defendants.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶17

Defendant No.1 was in need of financial assistance for business purpose and hence approached the applicant Bank for availing loan facilities along with applications.

¶18

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 2 of 9

¶19

As per the loan applications of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the following loan facilities to the defendants.

¶20

Name of facility	Amount Rs.	Date of Sanction
1 Term Loan	9,00,000/-	25.03.2011
2 Cash Credit	4,50,000/-	31.03.2011
3 Term Loan	15,00,000/-	04.08.2012
4 MKCC	2,25,000/-	30.09.2016
5 Term Loan	3,50,000/-	02.03.2017

¶21

Defendant Nos.2 and 3 stood guarantors for the repayment of Term Loan of Rs.9,00,000/- and Cash Credit loan availed by defendant No.1. Defendant Nos.3 and 4 stood guarantors for the repayment of Term Loan of Rs.15,00,000/- availed by defendant No.1.

¶22

As per request of defendant No.1, the applicant Bank enhanced the Cash Credit facility of Rs.4,50,000/to Rs.6,50,000/- on 25.09.2013.

¶23

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants have executed necessary loan and security documents along with deed of hypothecation in favour of the applicant Bank.

¶24

The defendants have also executed Letter of Balance and Security Confirmation on 28.02.2014,

¶25

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 3 of 9

¶26

30.06.2015, 31.03.2018 and 15.06.2019 in favour of the applicant Bank and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan accounts.

¶27

The applicant Bank contended that the defendants committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Therefore, on 27.12.2018, 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 10.03.2022, 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.

¶28

Hence, this application is filed.

¶29

The defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendants as per Order dated 24.03.2026 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶30

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Sarojkumar Ganesh Bhagat, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr.

¶31

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 4 of 9

¶32

Nos. AW-1-1 to AW-1-36 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶33

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

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.50,349/- towards Cash Credit facility, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.10,29,803/- towards Cash Credit facility is reduced to Rs.9,79,454/-.

¶37

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.6,119/- towards Term Loan of Rs.9 Lakh, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the

¶38

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 5 of 9

¶39

total claim amount of Rs.1,45,852/- towards Term Loan facility is reduced to Rs.1,39,732/-.

¶40

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.8,028/- towards Term Loan of Rs.15 Lakh, which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.1,44,974/- towards Term Loan facility is reduced to Rs.1,36,946/-.

¶41

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.11,107/- towards Term Loan of Rs.3.50 Lakh which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.5,76,605/- towards Term Loan facility is reduced to Rs.5,65,498/-.

¶42

The applicant Bank has claimed Penal Interest of Rs.11,741/- towards MKCC loan facility which cannot be granted and the same is required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.3,66,517/- towards Term Loan facility is reduced to Rs.3,54,775/-.

¶43

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest for Cash Credit @14.50% per annum, for three Term Loans @14%, 15% and 10.75% per annum respectively and for MKCC

¶44

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 6 of 9

¶45

@7% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted for Cash Credit, for three Term Loans @9% per annum (simple) respectively and for MKCC @7% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest. Hence, I pass the following order.

¶46

O R D E R

¶47

A} Original Application No. 589/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶48

B} Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.9,79,454/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Seventy Nine Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Four only) towards Cash Credit along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.03.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶49

C} Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.1,39,732/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Two only) towards Term Loan of Rs.9 Lakh along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.03.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this

¶50

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 7 of 9

¶51

operative order.

¶52

D} Defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 either jointly or severally shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.1,36,946/(Rupees One Lakh Thirty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Six only) towards Term Loan of Rs.15 Lakh along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.03.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶53

E} Defendant No. 1 shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.5,65,498/- (Rupees Five Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Eight only) towards Term Loan of Rs.3.50 Lakh along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.03.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶54

F} Defendant No. 1 shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.3,54,775/- (Rupees Three Lakh Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Five only) towards MKCC Loan along with future interest @7% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 19.03.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶55

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 8 of 9

¶56

G} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶57

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

¶58

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 11.06.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶59

Sanap ( OA No. 589/2022 ) 9 of 9

Bank of Maharashtra v. Deepak Kadam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Deepak Kadam

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 Baroda versus M/S Sanjay Trading Company Prop Sanjay Sopan Ursal

State Bank of India versus Shyambabu

Union Bank of India versus Sadhu

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

State Bank of India versus Shaikh Salauddin

State Bank of India versus M/S. Bhagyalaxmi Industries Prop Mr. Rameshwar Kundalik Mane