Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Gorakh Laxman Soutade

DRT6 Aug 2026OA/716/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the application filed by Union Bank of India for recovery of Rs. 26,03,834/- along with future interest at 7% p.a. The court confirmed the bank's claim for charge over mortgaged agricultural properties and directed the issue of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 26,03,834/- with future interest @7% p.a., confirmation of charge over mortgaged properties, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Union Bank of India versus Gorakh Laxman Soutade — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 17.11.2025 Registered on: 06.12.2025 Decided on: 06.08.2026 Duration: Y M D 00 08 19

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 716/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 26,03,834/-

¶4

Union Bank of India,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970, Having its Registered office at 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 & having branches amongst the other places at Rashin, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar through its Authorized Person, Mr. Harish Anil Raut (Branch Manager), Age: 35 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Rashin, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar 413710

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Mr. Gorakh Laxman Soutade, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri. R/o.: At Post Soutadewasti Sonalwadi, Rashin Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar, 414403.

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 1 of 9

[AMBADAS]

2. Mr. Sagar Sanjay Sul, Age: Major, Occ.: Agri. R/o.: At Akhoni, Rashin Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar, 414403.

…Defendants

APPEARANCES

For the Applicant

For Defendants

Mr. Pratik Santosh Chandiwal - Advocate Ex-parte

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Delivered on 06.08.2026

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 26,03,834/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Three Thousand, Eight Hundred and Thirty Four only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 17.11.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶21

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶22

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant No. 1 approached and requested the Applicant Bank to sanction Term Loan Facility.

¶23

Upon considering the request and financial needs of the

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 2 of 9

[AMBADAS]

Defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 3,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 10.06.2021 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @8.85% p.a. with half yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶28

That, thereafter, the Defendant No. 1 & 2 approached and requested the Applicant Bank to sanction another Term Loan Facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank Sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 20,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 05.06.2023 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for the aforesaid loan was @10.30% p.a. with half yearly rests. The Defendants also agreed to pay additional interest @2% by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 3 of 9

[AMBADAS]

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, Declaration (Annusuchi) u/s. 5(1) of The Maharashtra Provision of Facilities for Agriculture Credit by Banks Act, 1974 dated 03.06.2021, letter of undertaking, demand promissory note, & hypothecation agreement. Additionally defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor for defendant No. 1 and executed deed of guarantee in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶33

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendants created first charge over their immovable property by executing declaration under The Maharashtra Provision of Facilities for Agriculture Credit by Banks Act, 1974 dated 03.06.2021 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following properties-

¶34

i) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 60 R, out of Gut No. 452/1, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under. East: Gut No. 452/2,

¶35

West: Road, South: Gut No. 446, 450, 451,

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 4 of 9

[AMBADAS]

North: 455.

ii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 1 H 32 R, P.K. 0 H 16 R out of Gut No. 466, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under.

¶41

East: Gut No. 468, West: Gut No. 461, South: Gut No. 440, 467, North: 464.

¶42

iii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 62 R, P.K. 0 H 13 R out of Gut No. 467, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under.

¶43

East: Gut No. 468, 469, West: Gut No. 440, South: Gut No. 414, North: 466, 468.

¶44

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

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 5 of 9

[AMBADAS]

to pay the same. The loan account of the defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 28.10.2024. Therefore, on 08.08.2025 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.

¶49

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 17.04.2026.

¶50

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Harish Anil Raut, Branch Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-25 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶51

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

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 6 of 9

[AMBADAS]

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.

¶56

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

¶57

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @8.85% & @10.30% p. a. from the date of filing i.e. 17.11.2025 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.

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(A) Original Application No. 716/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶60

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 26,03,834/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lacs, Three Thousand, Eight Hundred and Thirty Four

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 7 of 9

[AMBADAS]

only), along with future interest @ 7% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the O.A. i.e. 17.11.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶65

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable properties vide Declaration (Annusuchi) u/s. 5(1) of The Maharashtra Provision of Facilities for Agriculture Credit by Banks Act, 1974 dated 03.06.2021 at Exh. A-10 & A-19 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶66

i) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 60 R, out of Gut No. 452/1, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under.

¶67

East: Gut No. 452/2,

¶68

West: Road, South: Gut No. 446, 450, 451,

¶69

North: 455.

¶70

ii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 1 H 32 R, P.K. 0 H 16 R out of Gut No. 466, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under. East: Gut No. 468,

¶71

West: Gut No. 461, South: Gut No. 440, 467, North: 464.

(OA No.716/2025)

Page 8 of 9

[AMBADAS]

iii) All that piece and parcel of Agricultural land admeasuring 0 H 62 R, P.K. 0 H 13 R out of Gut No. 467, situated at Village Sonalwadi, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar., which is bounded as under. East: Gut No. 468, 469, West: Gut No. 440, South: Gut No. 414, North: 466, 468.

¶76

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged immovable properties and hypothecated articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶77

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶78

(F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendants.

¶79

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶80

Sd/Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.06.08.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶81

(OA No.716/2025)

¶82

Page 9 of 9

¶83

[AMBADAS]

Union Bank of India v. Gorakh Laxman Soutade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Gorakh Laxman Soutade

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sanjay Anantrao Lokhande

Hdfc Bank versus Vijaykumar Ashok Patil

Icici Bank Limited versus Baban Bhujaba Keskar

Uco Bank versus Sanjay Vitthal Baviskar

Bank of India versus Ramsingh Tulsiram Rathod

Bank of India versus Ms Dwarka Frame Makers