Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Jayaram Lahanu Hase

DRT12 Aug 2026OA/698/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 22,70,174 and future interest from four defendants who failed to repay sanctioned term and crop loans. The court accepted the bank's evidence ex parte, granted future interest at 7% p.a., and enforced the mortgage charge over the mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay Rs. 22,70,174 with future interest at 7% p.a. simple; enforcing mortgage charge over specified properties and issuing Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Jayaram Lahanu Hase — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 31.10.2025 Registered on: 25.11.2025 Decided on: 12.08.2026 Duration: Y M D 00 09 12

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 698/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 22,70,174/Union Bank of India, (Erstwhile “Corporation Bank”) a Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Registered office

¶4

at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Sangamner, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, Through its Authorized Person, Mr. Sandip Balasaheb Suryawanshi (Branch Manager), Age: 41 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o.: Sangamner, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar 422601.

… Applicant

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Versus

1. Mr. Jayram Lahanu Hase, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar 422605.

¶11

2. Mr. Vimal Jayram Hase, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar 422605.

¶12

3. Mr. Bhausaheb Lahanu Hase,

¶13

Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar 422605.

¶14

4. Mr. Arjun Kedarnath Hase, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri., R/o.: At Post Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar 422605.

¶15

…Defendants

¶16

APPEARANCES For the Applicant For Defendants

¶17

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

¶18

JUDGMENT Delivered on 12.08.2026

¶19

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the

¶20

recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,70,174/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs,

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Seventy Thousand, One Hundred and Seventy Four only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 31.10.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶25

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶26

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 & 2 approached and requested the Applicant Bank seeking financial assistance. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendants, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 5,00,000/- & Crop Loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 26.12.2014 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @11.35% & @10.85% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶27

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank.

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

These included sanction letter, registered declaration (Anusuchi)

¶32

u/s. 5 (1) of the Maharashtra Provision of Facilities for

¶33

Agriculture Credit by Banks Act, 1974 dated 26.12.2012, letter of

¶34

undertaking, demand promissory note, letter of continuity & hypothecation agreement. Etc., Additionally defendant No. 3 & 4 stood as guarantors for defendant No. 1 & 2 and executed deed of guarantor in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶35

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant No. 1 to 4 created first charge over their immovable property by executing registered declaration (Anusuchi) u/s. 5 (1) of the Maharashtra Provision of Facilities for Agriculture Credit by Banks Act, 1974 dated 26.12.2012 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶36

i) All that piece and parcel of Grampanchayat Milkat No. 999 admeasuring 450 sq. ft. situated at Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as per record of rights.

¶37

ii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 40 R, out of Gat No. 36/5, situated at village Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as per record of rights.

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The applicant bank contended that the defendants have failed to

¶42

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 14.02.2020. Therefore, on 18.09.2025 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.

¶43

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 27.04.2026.

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Sandip Balasaheb Suryawanshi, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exhibit A-1 to A-18 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶48

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

¶49

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.

¶50

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

¶51

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @12.50% p. a. on term loan from the date of filing i.e. 31.10.2025 of this application

(OA No.698/2025)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶56

ORDER

¶57

(A) Original Application No. 698/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶58

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 22,70,174/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Seventy Thousand, One Hundred and Seventy Four only), along with future interest @ 7% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 31.10.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶59

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties vide documents at Exh. A-11 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶60

i) All that piece and parcel of Grampanchayat Milkat No. 999 admeasuring 450 sq. ft. situated at Rajapur, Tq.

¶61

(OA No.698/2025) Page 7 of 8

¶62

[AMBADAS]

¶63

Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as per record of rights.

¶64

ii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 40 R, out of Gat No. 36/5, situated at village Rajapur, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, which is bounded as per record of rights.

¶65

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and Hypothecated Articles / Good 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/-

¶70

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.12.08.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶71

(OA No.698/2025)

¶72

Page 8 of 8

¶73

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Jayaram Lahanu Hase

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Jayaram Lahanu Hase

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 Maharashtra versus Ms Akshay Trading Company

Axis Bank versus Sanjay Bhagwansingh Chavan

Bank of Maharashtra versus Dnyaneshwar

Idbi Bank versus Balasaheb Pandharinath Shelke

State Bank of India versus Nitin Nandlal Zagre

Idbi Bank versus Kishor Tatyasaheb Jojare