Allowed

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Kashinath Lad

DRT25 May 2026OA/954/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the State Bank of India's application for recovery of Rs. 33,25,37.94 plus future interest against a deceased home loan applicant. Court modified future interest to 8% simple and directed sale of the mortgaged property. Defendant was absent; order ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to pay Rs. 33,25,637.94 plus future interest at 8% p.a. simple; mortgaged property directed to be sold; Recovery Certificate issued.

State Bank of India versus Rajendra Kashinath Lad — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 05.11.2024 Registered on: 31.12.2024 Decided on: 25.05.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 06 20

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 954/2024

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 33,25,637.94/-

¶4

State Bank of India,

¶5

A Body Corporate constituted under the, State Bank of India Act, 1955, and its Central office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400021, and one of its branch Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Aurangabad, at Plot No. 1 Ground Floor, Administrative Building, Town Centre, N-5, CIDCO, Chh. Sambhaji Nagar – 431 004 through, Shivaji Vitthalrao Daud, Age: 55 years, Occ.: Service, Deputy Manager & City case Officer, State Bank of India, Branch at SAR, Branch Aurangabad and having authority to file the Application which includes the authority to sign and verify the application.

… Applicant

Versus

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 1 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Rajendra Kashinath Lad,

¶12

R/o.: At Grampanchayat Milkat No. 976/1, Gut No. 12, Mahakala, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna – 431212. Also at: At Flat No. 30 Radhakrishna, Nagri, Anandn, Wadgaon Budruk, Pune – 4111 051. Also at: Unique Institute of Higher Learning Pvt. Apartment No. 1 to 6, Vastu Chamber, Shirole Road, Pune – 411 004.

¶13

APPEARANCES

¶14

…Defendant

¶15

For the Applicant Mr. Ashok M. Kekan –Advocate For Defendant Ex-parte

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Delivered on 25.05.2026

¶18

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 33,25,637.94/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs, Twenty Five Thousand, Six Hundred Thirty Seven and Ninety Four Paisa Only), along with future interest from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 05.11.2024, until the date of realization of the entire outstanding dues from the Defendant.

¶19

Brief facts of the application are as under:

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 2 of 8

[AMBADAS]

The Applicant Bank states that the Defendant had approached and requested the Applicant Bank for Home loan. Upon considering the request and financial needs of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank sanctioned Home loan of Rs. 26,19,000/- which includes Rs. 25,00,000/- at Home Loan Max Gain and Rs. 1,19,000/- as funding of Home Loan Insurance cover vide arrangement letter dated 07.02.2020 on certain terms and conditions. The agreed rate of interest for aforesaid loan facility was @ 9.15% 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.

¶24

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant executed various loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. These included arrangement letter, letter of undertaking, registered Mortgaged Deed executed and registered on 06.02.2020 in the office of Sub-Registrar Ambad Tq. Ambad Dist.

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 3 of 8

[AMBADAS]

Jalna vide Day book Sr. No. 583/2020 and housing loan agreement etc.

¶29

The Applicant Bank further contends that, in order to secure the aforesaid loan facility, the Defendant created first charge over his immovable property by executing registered Mortgaged Deed and registered on 06.02.2020 in the office of Sub-Registrar Ambad, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna vide Day book Sr. No. 583/202023 in favour of the Applicant Bank. The mortgage was created in respect of the following property:

¶30

All that piece and parcel At Grampanchayat Milkat No. 976/1, Gut No. 12, Mahakala, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna. Admeasuring area 2178 Sq. Ft & Built up area 2451 Sq. Ft., which is bounded as under:

¶31

East: Jalna Road, West: Property of Mr. Manik Ashruba, South: Property of Mr. Dashrath Dattatraya, North: Property of Mr. Manik Nikam.

¶32

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.

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 4 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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 29.01.2022. Therefore, on 17.10.2024 the applicant bank issued legal Notice to the defendant. The defendant failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶37

The defendant failed to appear in matter though he was duly served. Hence, the defendant was proceeded ex-parte as per Order dated 27.03.2025.

¶38

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Shivaji Vitthalrao Daud, Deputy Manager & CCO of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Annexure A-1 to A-17 along with list of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 5 of 8

[AMBADAS]

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

¶43

Since the defendant 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.

¶44

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

¶45

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @ 9.15% from the date of filing i.e. 05.11.2024 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), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 6 of 8

[AMBADAS]

ORDER

(A) Original Application No. 954/2024 is allowed with costs.

¶51

(B) The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 33,25,637.94/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs, Twenty Five Thousand, Six Hundred Thirty Seven and Ninety Four Paisa Only), along with future interest @ 8% per annum (simple), from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 05.11.2024 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶52

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the mortgage of the following immovable property vide documents at Annexure A-7 to A-9 in list of documents Exh. 5.

¶53

All that piece and parcel At Grampanchayat Milkat No. 976/1, Gut No. 12, Mahakala, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna. Admeasuring area 2178 Sq. Ft & Built up area 2451 Sq. Ft., which is bounded as under: East: Jalna Road, West: Property of Mr. Manik Ashruba, South: Property of Mr. Dashrath Dattatraya, North: Property of Mr. Manik Nikam..

(OA No.954/2024)

Page 7 of 8

[AMBADAS]

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the mortgaged

¶58

immovable property to recover its dues.

¶59

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶60

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

¶61

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

Pronounced in open court. (Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place: Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date:.25.05.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶64

(OA No.954/2024)

¶65

Page 8 of 8

¶66

[AMBADAS]

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Kashinath Lad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Rajendra Kashinath Lad

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 India versus Rajshree Deepak Joshi

Axis Bank versus M/S. Civilcon Infrastructure India Private Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Bhatu Soma Wankhede

Axis Bank versus M/S Tejas Trading Company

Axis Bank versus M/S Hanuman Agro Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Sulochanabai Appasaheb Shinde