Allowed

Canara Bank v. Pravin Sawant

DRT23 Apr 2026OA/963/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an original application for recovery of bank loans, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the claim against an absent defendant. The court determined the principal amount by cross-checking account statements and awarded future interest at 9% per annum, directing issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs.21,45,697/- with future interest @9% p.a. and issue of Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus Pravin Sawant — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on .. 11.03.2023 Registered on .. 16.06.2023 Decided on .. 23.04.2026 Duration .. Y—M—D 03--01--12

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 963/2023.

¶3

Canara Bank,

¶4

A Body Corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 having its head office at 112 JC Road, Bangalore and branch office at Shop No.3, Ravindroday Plaza, Kalambaste, Ratnagiri 415 605.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Mr. Pravin Pandurang Sawant, Age Adult, Occ. Business,

¶8

R/at – (A) At and Post Kalambaste, Room No. 302, B Wing, Dnyaneshwari Apartment, Taluka Chiplun, District Ratnagiri 415 605. (B) B Number 3, TRT Ground, Near Pohali Market, Pohali, Taluka Chiplun, District Ratnagiri 415 605.

¶9

… Defendant

¶10

Appearances :-

¶11

For Applicant Adv Bhakti Rokade i/b Adv Srinivas Y. For Defendant Ex parte.

¶12

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 1 of 6

¶13

Total Claim Amount – Rs.22,68,728/-

¶14

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 23^rd April, 2026)

¶15

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs.22,68,728/- together with future interest @11.50 and 10.50% per annum from the date of Application till realization of the entire dues from the defendant.

¶16

Brief facts of the application are as under :-

¶17

The defendant was in need of financial assistance, therefore, approached the applicant Bank. As per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Cash Credit facility of Rs.10,00,000/under the CGFMU Scheme to the defendant for the purpose of working capital requirement vide Sanction Letter dated 07.12.2019.

¶18

Thereafter, again as per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Working Capital facility of Rs.1,00,000/- under the CGFMU Scheme to the defendant for the purpose of construction business vide Sanction Letter dated 11.06.2020.

¶19

Again as per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Guaranteed Emergency

¶20

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 2 of 6

¶21

Credit Line facility of Rs.1,85,000/- to the defendant for the purpose of construction business vide Sanction Letter dated 26.06.2020.

¶22

Once again as per the loan application of the defendant, the applicant Bank sanctioned the Term Loan facility of Rs.10,00,000/- to the defendant for the purpose of construction business under Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana vide Sanction Letter dated 19.08.2020.

¶23

In order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant has executed necessary loan and security documents in favour of the applicant Bank along with hypothecation.

¶24

The defendant has also executed Letters of Acknowledgment of Debt and Security on 09.05.2022 and thereby confirmed the balance outstanding in loan accounts.

¶25

The applicant Bank contended that the defendant committed defaults in payment of installments and failed to regularize the accounts. Hence, on 28.02.2022, the applicant Bank has classified the account of the defendant as Non-Performing Asset in accordance with guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, on 02.03.2023, the applicant Bank issued legal Notice to the

¶26

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 3 of 6

¶27

defendant. Despite service of Notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank.

¶28

Hence, this application is filed.

¶29

The defendant failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against the defendant as per Order dated 08.04.2026 passed below Application (Exhibit-1).

¶30

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-6) of Mr. Vishal Bapurao Shinde, Branch Manager and Principal Officer of the applicant Bank, and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents at Sr. Nos. AW-1-1 to AW-1-31 along with list (Exhibit 7), which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

¶31

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

¶32

Since the defendant failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs.

¶33

The applicant Bank has claimed relief in respect of hypothecated assets. However, there is no detailed

¶34

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 4 of 6

¶35

description with respect to the hypothecated assets, therefore, the relief in terms of hypothecated assets cannot be granted.

¶36

According to the applicant Bank, balance as per statement of account is Rs.11,55,225/- for Cash Credit facility; Rs.32,251/- for Working Capital Facility; Rs.1,51,735/- for Guaranteed Emergency Credit Line facility and Rs.9,29,516/- for Term Loan facility. However, the statements of account produced by the applicant Bank itself shows balance of Rs.14,159/- for Working Capital facility and Rs.46,797/- for Guaranteed Emergency Credit line facility. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled to Rs.14,159/- and not Rs.32,251/- for Working Capital facility and Rs.46,797/- and not Rs.1,51,735/- for Guaranteed Emergency Credit line facility. Therefore, the total claim of the applicant Bank comes to Rs.21,45,697/and not Rs.22,68,728/-. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.22,68,728/- is reduced to Rs.21,45,697/-.

¶37

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11.50 and 10.50% per annum. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is

¶38

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 5 of 6

¶39

granted @9% per annum (simple), it would be just and reasonable rate of interest.

¶40

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶41

O R D E R

¶42

A} Original Application No. 963/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶43

B} The defendant shall pay to the applicant Bank the sum of Rs.21,45,697/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakh Forty Five Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Seven only) along with future interest @9% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 11.03.2023 till full payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶44

C} Issue Recovery Certificate.

¶45

D} The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and defendant.

¶46

Sd/( Dilip G. Murumkar ) Place : Pune Presiding Officer Date : 23.04.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶47

Sanap ( OA No. 963/2023 ) 6 of 6

Canara Bank v. Pravin Sawant

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Pravin Sawant

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

Hdfc Bank versus Punam Enterprises through Its Proprietor Mrs. Punam Matte

Canara Bank versus Bhaskar Veer

Bank of Maharashtra versus Nazma

Hdfc Bank versus M/S.Ravindra Shashikant Shah Prop. Mr. Ravindra Shashikant Shah

Federal Bank versus Sarjerav

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Siddhram Mhetre