Allowed

Bank of India v. Mr. Dattatraya Karbhari Landage

DRT2 Jul 2026OA/640/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of India's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 26,16,990.05 along with secured immovable property, following a default on agricultural and term loans. The defendants were proceeded ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 26,16,990.05 plus future interest at 7% p.a. secured by mortgaged land in Village Korhale and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of India versus Mr. Dattatraya Karbhari Landage — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 12.09.2025 Registered on: 10.11.2025 Decided on: 02.07.2026 Duration: Y M D 00 09 20

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 640/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 26,16,990.05/-

¶4

Bank of India, A Body Corporate constituted under

¶5

the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Head Office at Star House, “C-5”, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Comples, Bandra (East), Mumbai and having branches amongst the other places at Shirdi, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar, through its Power of Attorney, Mr. Vivek Kumar (Chief Manager) Age: 45 … Applicant yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o.: Deolali, Cantt. Nashik.

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mr. Dattatraya Karbhari Landage, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Sakuri, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar 423109.

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

2. Mr. Santosh Bhanudas Bawake,

¶12

Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Sakuri, Tq. Rahata, …Defendants Dist. Ahmednagar 423109.

¶13

APPEARANCES

¶14

For the Applicant Mr. K.D. Pande Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Delivered on 02.07.2026

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 26,16,990.05/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Sixteen Thousand, Nine Hundred Ninety and Five Paisa only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 12.09.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

That, the defendant No. 1 had approached to the Applicant bank and requested to sanction Crop Loan & Term Loan. Upon considering the request and need of the defendants, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Crop loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- & Term Loan Facility

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

of Rs. 12,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 14.01.2015 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest was @ 13.75% & @ 13.75% p.a. respectively with half yearly rests. The defendants also agreed to pay an additional interest by way of liquidated damages @ 2% p.a. in case of default in repayment. That, Thereafter the defendant No. 1 had again approached to the Applicant bank and requested to restructure the above Crop Loan. Upon considering the request and need of the defendants, the Applicant Bank restructured the Crop loan to the extent of Rs.. 68,505/- on 29.06.2015 on certain terms and conditions.

¶24

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank, including the sanction letters, hypothecation agreement, demand promissory note, registered mortgage deed bearing daybook no. 185 dated 14.01.2015. Additionally Defendant No. 2 stood as

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

guarantor for Defendant No.1 and executed a Deed of Guarantee

¶29

dated 14.01.2015 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶30

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the Loan sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over

¶31

their immovable property by executing a registered mortgage deed bearing daybook no. 185 dated 14.01.2015, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the

¶32

following property –

¶33

All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 32 R out of Gat No. 907, situated at Village Korhale, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under: East :- Gat No. 919, West :- Gat No. 907/Part, South:- Gat No. 907/Part, North: - Gat No. 907/Part.

¶34

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

¶35

to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendants failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed rate of interest as per terms and conditions of the sanction letter.

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 defendant became irregular and classified as NPA on 30.06.2018. Therefore, on 22.08.2025 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.

¶40

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through paper publication. Hence, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 20.05.2026.

¶41

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-04 of Mr. Vivek Kumar, POA of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-16 as per list of documents Exh.05 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶46

Since the defendants failed to appear and did not 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.

¶47

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

¶48

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @13.75% & @13.95 per annum respectively on loan from the date of filing i.e. 12.09.2025 of this application till realization of the claim amount. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @ 7% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 640/2025 is allowed with

¶54

costs.

¶55

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 26,16,990.05/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Sixteen Thousand, Nine Hundred Ninety and Five Paisa only), along with future interest @ 7% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 12.09.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶56

¶57

following immovable property vide registered documents at Exh. A-8 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶58

All that piece and parcel of agricultural land admeasuring 32 R out of Gat No. 907, situated at Village Korhale, Tq. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as under:

¶59

East :- Gat No. 919, West :- Gat No. 907/Part, South:- Gat No. 907/Part,

(OA No.640/2025)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

North: - Gat No. 907/Part.

¶64

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and hypothecated articles/goods

¶65

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/Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.02.07.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶70

(OA No.640/2025)

¶71

Page 8 of 8

¶72

[AMBADAS]

Bank of India v. Mr. Dattatraya Karbhari Landage

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Mr. Dattatraya Karbhari Landage

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Sadashiv Kashinath Bhor

Union Bank of India versus Mrs. Mira Bhima Holgir

Bank of Maharashtra versus Smt.Shailabai Machindra Gayke

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mr. Ravindra Visaram Padar

Bank of India versus Mrs. Manisha Sandeep Bhole

Union Bank of India versus M/S Srushti Agro Production