Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Smt. Kamlesh Gupta

DRT9 Nov 2023OA/121/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed a recovery application filed by ICICI Bank Ltd against borrowers for a housing loan default. The court directed the defendants to pay the principal amount with adjusted simple interest at 8% per annum and issued a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 1,24,17,034 with simple interest @8% p.a. from filing date; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Kamlesh Gupta — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.121/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 12.01.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 09^th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited , a body corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, having its Registered Office at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara-390007 and its Corporate Office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051, having Branches all over India and one of its Branches situated at I^st Floor, Near N.K. Sharma Office, ChandigarhAmbala National Highway, Zirakpur, District Mohali, Punjab, through its Authorised Signatory, Sh. Ashwini Verma

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Kamlesh Gupta w/o Sh. Suresh Chand Gupta r/o Flat No. F- 101, I^st Floor Tower, Ninex City, Sector-76, Gurugram, Haryana122001

¶9

II^nd Address:

¶10

House No. A-167, Sanjay Nagar, ALTTC, Sector-23, Matiala, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002

¶11

Sh. Anshul Gupta s/o Sh. Suresh Chand Gupta r/o Flat No. F-101, I^st Floor Tower, Ninex City, Sector-76, Gurugram, Haryana122001

¶12

II^nd Address:

¶13

House No. A-167, Sanjay Nagar, ALTTC, Sector-23, Matiala,

¶14

OA/121/2022 ICICI BANK Vs KAMLESH GUPTA AND OTHERS 2

¶15

Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002

¶16

III^nd Address:

¶17

c/o Antech Marketing, D.S.M 448-449, DLF Tower, Moti Nagar,

¶18

Delhi-110015

¶19

Ninex Developer Limited, having its Registered Office at SF-05, Ninex City Mart, Sahona Road, Sector 49, Gurugram, Haryana122018

¶20

II^nd Address:

¶21

Gopi Ram Building, Village Sultanpur, New Delhi-110030

¶22

…..Defendants

¶23

Argued by: Sh. Rahul Garg counsel the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 19.08.2023

¶24

FINAL ORDER

¶25

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy

¶26

Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendants for recovery of Rs.1,24,17,034/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Four Lac Seventeen Thousand and Thirty

¶27

Four Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Ashwini Verma, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 24.04.2009, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶28

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendants had approached the applicant

¶29

bank for grant of housing loan facility of Rs. 100 lac vide loan application dated 30.08.2018, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶30

OA/121/2022 ICICI BANK Vs KAMLESH GUPTA AND OTHERS 3

¶31

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid facility to the defendants vide offer letter dated 31.08.2018, Annexure-A4 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶32

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendants executed facility arrangement dated 30.08.2018, Annexure-A3 (copy), allotment letter dated 02.06.2018, Annexure-A5 (copy) and apartment buyer’s agreement dated 28.07.2018, Annexure-A7 (copy).

¶33

The aforesaid loan was further secured by creation of mortgage by defendant No. 2 in respect of apartment No. F-101 measuring 2863 Square Feet on the I^st floor in F Block, Ninex City, situated in the revenue estate of Khekhri-Daula, Sector 76, Gurugram, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5(v) of the Original Application. Letter dated 25.06.2018 regarding permission to mortgage is Annexure-A6 (copy).

¶34

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facility was duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank leading to the loan account becoming irregular and it being classified as NPA on 30.11.2019. The applicant bank recalled entire outstanding amount vide loan recall notice dated 24.12.2019 along with its postal details, Annexure-A8 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶35

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of

¶36

Rs.1,24,17,034/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Four Lac

¶37

OA/121/2022 ICICI BANK Vs KAMLESH GUPTA AND OTHERS 4

¶38

Seventeen Thousand and Thirty Four Only) , is recoverable against the defendants as per statement of account, certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891, Annexure-A9 (colly) (copy).

¶39

Since the defendants did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.

¶40

Notices of the Original Application were duly served upon the defendants, but since none appeared on behalf of the defendants, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 19.08.2023 .

¶41

In support of contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Ashwini Verma, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank was filed.

¶42

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced by the learned counsel and gone through the record carefully.

¶43

It was argued by the learned counsel that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case against the defendants for recovery of the amount sought. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A9 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them. It is further clear that the defendants had executed all the relevant documents as stated above in favour of the applicant bank. Unfortunately, the defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement executed between the parties. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is

¶44

OA/121/2022 ICICI BANK Vs KAMLESH GUPTA AND OTHERS 5

¶45

entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,24,17,034/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Four Lac Seventeen Thousand and Thirty Four Only) from the defendants.

¶46

In so far as pendent lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank has claimed rate of interest @24% per annum with monthly rests. In facility arrangement dated 30.08.2018, Annexure-A3 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @8.70% per annum.

¶47

This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogatives of mercy and magnanimity are the brightest jewels in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including the Pandemic Covid-19 affecting businesses, nature of the mortgaged property, purpose of loan, i.e. housing, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶48

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs holding that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.1,24,17,034/- (Rupees One Crore Twenty Four Lac Seventeen Thousand and Thirty Four Only) with current and future simple interest @8% per annum w.e.f. 12.01.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from

¶49

OA/121/2022 ICICI BANK Vs KAMLESH GUPTA AND OTHERS 6

¶50

the sale of mortgaged/hypothecated property of the defendants in execution proceedings, if not sold earlier under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 or otherwise. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. However, the applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶51

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶52

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 21.12.2023 .

¶53

Copy of this order be sent to the applicant bank and the defendants through registered/speed post. This order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal.

¶54

Pronounced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Smt. Kamlesh Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Smt. Kamlesh Gupta

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

Mr Vijaykumar Sarvaiya versus Sbfc Finance Private Limited

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Adarsh Chaudhary

Punjab National Bank versus Ramesh Chand Rawat

Hdfc Bank versus Kanchan Singh

Canara Bank versus M/S Yogender Aggarwal

Hdfc Bank versus Tirumalsetty Lakshmi Kiran