Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr Sachin Mandhare

DRT17 Feb 2026OA/691/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal at Pune allowed an application filed by State Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 41,93,000 plus future interest. Due to the respondent's ex-parte absence, the Tribunal modified the claimed interest rate from 15% to 9% per annum and directed enforcement of an existing equitable mortgage via sale of secured property.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 41,93,000 plus future interest at 9% per annum from 01.02.2022; equitable mortgage to be enforced.

State Bank of India versus Mr Sachin Mandhare — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 01.02.2022 Registered on .. 06.08.2022 Decided on .. 17.02.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 04--00--16

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 691/2022.

¶3

State Bank of India, A Banking Company incorporated under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970, having its Head Office at – 8^th floor, State Bank Bhavan, Nariman Point, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai 400 021 and its branch at – Godoli, Satara, District Satara.

¶4

… Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Mr. Sachin Bapurao Mandhare, Flat No. 2, Adarsh Pride, Priwadi, Godoli, Satara 415 003.

¶7

Appearances :-

¶8

For Applicant Adv Pooja Mali i/b M.V. Kini & Co. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶9

Total Claim Amount – Rs.41,93,000/-

¶10

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 17^th February, 2026)

¶11

Sanap ( OA No. 691/2022 ) 1 of 5

¶12

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.41,93,000/- together with future interest @15% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶13

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶14

As per the loan application dated 22.04.2016 of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term Loan facility of Rs.30,00,000/- to the defendant vide Sanction Letter dated 16.05.2016.

¶15

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 created security interest over the property mentioned in Schedule B i.e. all the piece and parcel of Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, admeasuring 51.58 square meters, Adarsh Surya, Plot No. 6 and 7 at Saidapur, Taluka and District Satara in favour of the applicant Bank by way of equitable mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds vide memorandum of equitable mortgage dated 16.05.2016.

¶16

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed

¶17

Sanap ( OA No. 691/2022 ) 2 of 5

¶18

to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 28.02.2017, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 27.01.2022, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶19

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 04.09.2025 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶20

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Mahesh Laxman Dalvi, Regional Manager and Authorized Signatory of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1 to AW-12 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶21

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

¶22

Since the defendant failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the

¶23

Sanap ( OA No. 691/2022 ) 3 of 5

¶24

applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶25

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.

¶26

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @15% 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.

¶27

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

A} Original Application No. 691 is allowed with costs. B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.41,93,000/- (Rupees Forty One Lakh Ninety Three Thousand only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 01.02.2022 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶30

C} The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the equitable mortgage in respect of all the piece and parcel

¶31

Sanap ( OA No. 691/2022 ) 4 of 5

¶32

of Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, admeasuring 51.58 square meters, Adarsh Surya, Plot No. 6 and 7 at Saidapur, Taluka and District Satara, more particularly described in the Schedule B of the Original Application.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

Sanap ( OA No. 691/2022 ) 5 of 5

State Bank of India v. Mr Sachin Mandhare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr Sachin Mandhare

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 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

Canara Bank versus Namdev Khandekar