Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte

DRT7 Jan 2026OA/85/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of defaulting dues of approximately Rs. 22.26 Lakhs from Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte. The court reduced future interest to 9% simple interest and secured the judgment debt via hypothecation.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,26,282/- and future interest at 9% p.a. (simple); securement by hypothecation of assets; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 05.08.2023 Registered on: 15.02.2024 Decided on: 07.01.2026 Duration: Y M D 02 05 02

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 85/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 22,26,282/-

¶4

Bank of Maharashtra ,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the provisions of Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970, Having its Head Office at 1501, “Lokmangal”, 1501 Shivaji Nagar, Pune 411 005, and branches amongst the other places at Mid Corporate, Waluj, Dist. Aurangabad through its Authorized Person, Mr. Sadal Apparao s/o Sadal Babia (Senior Manager Scale-III), Age: 46 yrs., Occ.: Service, R/o. Waluj, Dist. Aurangabad 431136.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte Proprietor of Ms. Vidya Syntax Age: Major, Occ.: Business, R/o.: Plot No. 44, Gat No. 34, Sailaxmi Engineering, Sai Industrial Co Estate, Sector K, MIDC Waluj, Aurangabad-431136.

(OA No.85/2024)

Page 1 of 7

[AMBADAS]

AND/OR Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte Proprietor of Ms. Vidya Syntax Age: Major, Occ.: Business, R/o.: House No. 1231, At Savitrabai Phule Nagar, Wadgaon Kolhati, F Sector, Plot No. 4, Suraj Window, Aurangabad-431136.

¶13

…Defendant

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant Mr. K.D. Pande -Advocate For Defendant Ex-parte

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Delivered on 07.01.2026

¶18

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,26,282/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Twenty Six Thousand, Two Hundred and Eighty Two only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 05.08.2023, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendant.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶20

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant had approached and requested the Applicant Bank with a request to sanction

(OA No.85/2024)

Page 2 of 7

[AMBADAS]

Term Loan facility & Cash Credit Facility. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Term Loan facility of Rs. 15,00,000/- & Cash Credit Facility of Rs. 3,75,000/- vide, sanction letter dated 26.03.2019 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest was @ 11% p.a. with monthly rests. The Defendant also agreed to pay additional interest by way of liquidated damages in the event of any default in repayment.

¶25

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

¶26

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the Defendant executed hypothecation agreement on 25.04.2019 thereby hypothecating borrowers

¶27

present and future movables plants, machineries, goods, stocks of

(OA No.85/2024)

Page 3 of 7

[AMBADAS]

raw materials, items, inventories, stocks in process, semi-finished

¶32

and finished goods, stores and spares (Consumable stores and spares), stock in trade, goods in process, movables in transit, and present and future tangible and intangible assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademark, copyright, patent and all the right, title, interest etc., in favour of the applicant bank.

¶33

The applicant bank contended that the defendant has failed to keep his promise and commitments agreed by him with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The defendant 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 defendant to pay with the agreed rate of interest thereon, but the defendant failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the defendant became irregular and classified as NPA on 23.11.2019. Therefore on 11.05.2022 the applicant bank issued legal notice to the defendant through their advocate. Despite service of Notices, the defendant failed and

(OA No.85/2024)

Page 4 of 7

[AMBADAS]

neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶38

The defendant failed to appear in matter though he was served through court commissioner. Hence, the defendant was proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 17.09.2025.

¶39

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Sadal Apparao s/o. Sadal Babia, Senior Manager of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. A-1 to A-12 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶40

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

¶41

Since the defendant failed to appear and 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.85/2024)

Page 5 of 7

[AMBADAS]

The applicant Bank has claimed charge on hypothecated properties of the borrower.

¶46

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 11% p.a. on both the loans from the date of filing i.e. 05.08.2023 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) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(A) Original Application No. 85/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶49

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank a sum of 22,26,282/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs, Twenty Six Thousand, Two Hundred and Eighty Two only), along with future interest @ 9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.08.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

(OA No.85/2024)

Page 6 of 7

[AMBADAS]

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the hypothecation of borrower’s present and future movables plants, machineries, goods, stocks of raw materials, items, inventories, stocks in process, semifinished and finished goods, stores and spares (Consumable stores and spares), stock in trade, goods in process, movables in transit, and present and future tangible and intangible assets, vehicles, goodwill, trademark, copyright, patent and all the right, title, interest vide hypothecation agreement dated 25.04.2019 at Exh. A-5 in the list of documents Exh. 5.

¶54

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

¶55

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶56

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

¶57

(G)

¶58

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

Pronounced in open court. Place: Aurangabad Date:.07.01.2026

¶61

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

¶62

(OA No.85/2024)

¶63

Page 7 of 7

¶64

[AMBADAS]

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Mrs. Vidya Santosh Zalte

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

Canara Bank versus M/S Mauli Agriclinic and Business Centre

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Satyam Trading Company

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Chandulal Naval Patil

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sunita Sharad Bhadane

Union Bank of India versus Sundarrao Madhavrao Kadam (Deceased)

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus M/s Dnyanai Agro Processing Centre