Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani

DRT9 Jun 2026OA/694/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by State Bank of India against Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani for recovery of Rs. 43,47,942.61 plus 8% simple interest as the borrower failed to appear and contest the claim.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs. 43,47,942.61 plus 8% simple interest from filing; applicant entitled to sell mortgaged property to recover dues.

State Bank of India versus Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 22.10.2025 Registered on: 25.11.2025 Decided on: 09.06.2026 Duration: Y M D 00 07 17

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 694/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 43,47,942.61/-

¶4

State Bank of India,

¶5

A body corporate constituted under the provisions of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 ( 23 of 1955) having it’s one of Local Head office at Synergy, BandrakKurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai, & Branches amongst the other places at Jargaon, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon through its Authorized Officer, Mr. Kishor Narayan Mahajan (Manager), Age: 56 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Jargaon, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani, Age: Adult, Occ. Business, R/o. Plot No. 9, Sindhi Colony, Behind Gurukul English Medium School, Pachora, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon 424201.

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 1 of 9

[AMBADAS]

2. Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani, Age: Adult, Occ. Business, R/o. Plot No. 9, Sindhi Colony, Behind Gurukul English Medium School, Pachora, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon 424201.

¶13

…Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶16

Mr. K.D. Pande -Advocate Ex-parte

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Delivered on 09.06.2026

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 43,47,942.61/- (Rupees Forty Three Lacs, Forty Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred Forty Two and Sixty One Paisa only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 22.10.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶20

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶21

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 & 2 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Home loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 2 of 9

[AMBADAS]

Defendants, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Home loan facility of Rs. 24,13,000/- vide arrangement letter dated 27.12.2019 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @ 8.40% per annum with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶26

That thereafter, the Defendant No. 1 & 2 had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Top – Up Home loan facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Top-Up Home loan facility of Rs. 24,00,000/- vide arrangement letter dated 18.01.2020 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @ 8.90% per annum with monthly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 3 of 9

[AMBADAS]

interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any

¶31

default in repayment.

¶32

¶33

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letters, Loan agreements, registered mortgage deed bearing document Nos. 1641 & 1642 dated 15.05.2020 in favor of the applicant bank.

¶34

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities sanctioned to them, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered mortgage deed bearing document Nos. 1641 & 1642

¶35

dated 15.05.2020, in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage

¶36

was created in respect of the following property –

¶37

All that piece & parcel of Plot No. 9 out of N.A. Survey No. 8/2/B/2 total area admeasuring 187 sq. meters, with R.C.C. buit-up within Pachora Municipal Council Area, situated at Krushnapuri, Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon, which is bounded as under:

¶38

East: Road & Use, West: Plot No. 16,

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 4 of 9

[AMBADAS]

South: Plot No. 10, North: Plot No. 8.

¶43

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to keep their promise and commitments agreed by them with regard 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. 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 defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 12.09.2025. Therefore, on 14.10.2025 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendants. The defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 5 of 9

[AMBADAS]

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 22.04.2026.

¶48

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Kishor Narayan Mahajan, Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-15 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶49

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

¶50

Since the defendants failed to appear and did not to file the written statement 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.

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 6 of 9

[AMBADAS]

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

¶55

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @8.90% p.a. from the date of filing i.e. 22.10.2025 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 @ 8% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(A) Original Application No. 694/2025 is allowed with

¶58

costs.

¶59

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 43,47,942.61/- (Rupees Forty Three Lacs, Forty Seven Thousand, Nine Hundred Forty

¶60

Two and Sixty One Paisa only),along with future interest

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 7 of 9

[AMBADAS]

@ 8% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the

¶65

O.A. i.e. 22.10.2025 till full payment/realization of the

¶66

amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶67

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgaged of the following immovable property vide document at Exhibit A-10 & A-11 in list of documents

¶68

Exhibit 5.

¶69

¶70

East: Road & Use, West: Plot No. 16, South: Plot No. 10, North: Plot No. 8.

¶71

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable property to recover its dues.

¶72

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

(OA No.694-2025)

Page 8 of 9

[AMBADAS]

(F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of the

¶77

Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶78

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶79

Sd/-

¶80

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.09.06.2026

¶81

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶82

(OA No.694-2025)

¶83

Page 9 of 9

¶84

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. Kanhaiyalal Kishanchand Nagarani

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ms Shilpa Agency versus Central Bank of India

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Shivrang Agrobase and Allied Products Pvt. Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Ramesh Budhaji Shinde

Canara Bank versus Mr. Sharad Appasaheb Labde

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Maruti Mhatarba Kadam

Bank of India versus Mr. Sudhakar Balu Shinde