Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shantilal Vishnupant Shejwal

DRT17 Aug 2026OA/717/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Original Application, the Bank of Maharashtra sought recovery of defaulted loan dues amounting to Rs. 22,16,247/- from two defendants. The defendants were absent. The Tribunal allowed the application, grant of recovery, adjunction of interest, and authorization to sell hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Awarded recovery of Rs. 22,16,247/- with future interest at 9% p.a., right to sell hypothecated assets, and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Shantilal Vishnupant Shejwal — Company and Corporate | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 26.07.2025 Registered on: 05.12.2025 Decided on: 17.08.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 00 21

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 717/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 22,16,247/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra, A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970, Having its Head Office at “Lokmangal”, 1501, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411 005 and branches amongst the other places at Bidkin, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad, through its Authorized person Mr. Ashwin Baba Ganvir (Senior Manager), Age: 35 years, Occ.: Service, R/o.: Bidkin, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Shantilal Vishnupant Shejwal, Prop. of M/s. SHIV ENTERPRISES Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: Near Nath Valley High School, Opp. Sainik School, Sahara Harmani, Kanchanwadi, Chh. Sambhajinagar 431001.

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 1 of 7

[AMBADAS]

Mr. Rajesh Bhimrao Kavle, Age: Major, Occ.: Business R/o.: Flat No. 6, A-5 Wing, Sara Harmony, Nath Valley School Road, Kanchanwadi, Chh. Sambhajinagar 431005. …Defendants

¶12

APPEARANCES

¶13

For the Applicant For Defendants

¶14

Mrs. Amrita P. Johar -Advocate Ex-parte

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Delivered on 17.08.2026

¶17

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,16,247/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Sixteen thousand, Two Hundred Forty Seven only), along with further interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 26.07.2025, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶18

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶19

The applicant bank states that, defendant No. 1 approached the applicant bank seeking financial assistance in the form of Term loan facility. Upon scrutiny of the submitted documents, the

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 2 of 7

[AMBADAS]

applicant bank sanctioned Term loan facility of Rs. 10,00,000/vide sanction letter dated 07.03.2018. The agreed rate of interest for Term loan facility was @11.75% p.a. with monthly rests. The defendants also agreed to pay an additional interest @ 2% by way of liquidated damages in case of default in repayment.

¶24

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendants executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included sanction letter, deed of hypothecation, demand promissory notes, letter of proprietorship, etc., in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶25

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the loan facilities sanctioned, the Defendants executed deed of Hypothecation, thereby hypothecating all kind of plant and machinery and present and future movable plants, machineries, goods, stocks of raw materials, items, inventories, stock in process, semi-finished and finished goods, stores and spares

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 3 of 7

[AMBADAS]

(consumable stores and spares), stock in trade, goods in process, movable in transit and present and future tangible and intangible assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademark, copyright, patent and all the

¶30

right etc.

¶31

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 30.11.2018. Therefore, on 17.06.2025 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.

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 4 of 7

[AMBADAS]

The defendants failed to appear in matter though they were served through RPAD. Hence, the defendants were proceeded exparte as per Order dated 29.04.2026.

¶36

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Ashwin S/o. Baba Ganvir, Senior 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.

¶37

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

¶38

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.

¶39

The applicant Bank has claimed charge over hypothecated properties of the borrowers.

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 5 of 7

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.75% p.a. from the date of filing i.e. 26.07.2025 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 @ 9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶44

ORDER

¶45

(A) Original Application No. 717/2025 is allowed with costs.

¶46

(B) The defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 22,16,247/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Sixteen thousand, Two Hundred Forty Seven only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 26.07.2025 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶47

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the all kind of plant and machinery and present and future movable plants, machineries, goods, stocks of raw materials, items, inventories, stock in process, semi-

(OA No.717/2025)

Page 6 of 7

[AMBADAS]

finished and finished goods, stores and spares (consumable stores and spares), stock in trade, goods in process, movable in transit and present and future tangible and intangible assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademark, copyright, patent and all the right etc. Vide hypothecation agreement dated 07.03.2018 at Exh. A-7 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶52

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

¶53

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶54

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

¶55

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:. 17.08.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶58

(OA No.717/2025)

¶59

Page 7 of 7

¶60

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shantilal Vishnupant Shejwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Shantilal Vishnupant Shejwal

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

Canara Bank versus Machindra

Hdfc Bank versus Badrinath Tukaram Idhate

Union Bank of India versus Agrimo Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus Kabir Vasanti Shekhar

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr. Shaikh Hasham Shaikh Hakim

Axis Bank versus Ayyub Sikandar Shaikh