Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Chander Bhan

DRT22 Jun 2023OA/1511/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-2, Chandigarh allowed an original application by ICICI Bank against three respondents for recovery of Rs. 37.50 lakhs advanced as an agricultural KCC facility. The court reduced future interest to 7% per annum by virtue of the pandemic and granted a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; Declaration of liability to pay Rs. 37,50,643.57 plus future simple interest at 7% p.a. from 16.08.2022.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Chander Bhan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1511/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.08.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 22^nd DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited , Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and a Banking Company within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and is having its Registered Office at Land Mark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390007 and inter-alia having Branch at Janta Market, Kaithal Road, Cheeka, District Kaithal, Haryana-136034, through its Manager, Sh. Parveen Kumar

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Chander Bhan S/o Sh. Fate Singh R/o Village Dhanori, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind, Haryana-126116

¶9

Smt. Sheela W/o Sh. Chander Bhan R/o Village Dhanori, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind, Haryana-126116

¶10

Sh. Shamsher Singh S/o Sh. Hazari Ram R/o Village Kailram, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana-136147

¶11

…..Defendants

¶12

Argued by: Sh. Mohamad Vajid, Authorised Signatory (GPA holder) for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 24.01.2023

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), against the defendants for recovery of

¶15

OA/1511/2022 ICICI VS CHANDER BHAN AND OTHERS 2

¶16

Rs.37,50,643.57/- (Rupees Thirty Seven lacs Fifty Thousand Six Hundred Forty Three and Fifty Seven Paisa Only) . It has been filed through Sh. Parveen Kumar, Manager of the applicant bank stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 09.03.2021, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶17

The brief facts of the case of the applicant as per Original Application are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for grant of KCC facility of Rs.26 lacs vide farmer finance facilities credit facility application form dated 05.09.2016, Annexure-A2 (copy).

¶18

The applicant bank sanctioned aforesaid credit facility of Rs. 25.50 lacs to the defendants vide sanction letter dated 09.09.2016, Annexure-A3 (copy) as per terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facility, the defendants executed hypothecation deed dated 09.09.2016, Annexure-A4 (copy).

¶20

The aforesaid loan was further secured by creation of registered mortgage by the defendants in respect of agricultural land measuring 85 Kanals 04 Marlas situated in the revenue estate of Malikpur, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind, Haryana, fully detailed in para No. 5(V) of the Original Application. Declaration dated 09.09.2016 under section 4(1) of the Haryana Agriculture Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1973, Annexure-A5 (copy).

¶21

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 and resultantly, the loan account was declared as NPA because it became irregular. The

¶22

OA/1511/2022 ICICI VS CHANDER BHAN AND OTHERS 3

¶23

applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide legal notices dated 11.04.2022, Annexure-A6 (colly) (copy) and dispatch details, Annexure-A7 (colly) (copy), but to no avail.

¶24

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account, a sum of Rs.37,50,643.57/- (Rupees Thirty Seven lacs fifty Thousand Six Hundred Forty Three and Fifty Seven Paisa Only) is recoverable against the defendants as per statement of account, Annexure-A8 (copy) certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act.

¶25

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

¶26

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 24.01.2023 .

¶27

In support of the contents of the OA, affidavit of evidence of Sh. Parveen Kumar, Manager of the applicant bank was filed.

¶28

This Tribunal has heard ex-parte arguments advanced Sh. Mohamad Vajid, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank and gone through the record carefully.

¶29

It was argued by Sh. Mohamad Vajid, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank 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 A8 , it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to

¶30

OA/1511/2022 ICICI VS CHANDER BHAN AND OTHERS 4

¶31

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 entitled to recover a sum of Rs.37,50,643.57/-

¶32

(Rupees Thirty Seven lacs fifty Thousand Six Hundred Forty

¶33

Three and Fifty Seven Paisa Only) from the defendants.

¶34

In so far as pendent lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed rate of interest @12% per annum plus penal interest @2% per annum. In sanction letter dated 09.09.2016, Annexure-A3 (copy), rate of interest has been mentioned @12% per annum.

¶35

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. agricultural, present conditions of economy based on agriculture, quantum of loan, prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yesteryears and defendant No. 2 being a lady, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @7% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶36

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum of Rs.37,50,643.57/- (Rupees Thirty Seven lacs fifty

¶37

OA/1511/2022 ICICI VS CHANDER BHAN AND OTHERS 5

¶38

Thousand Six Hundred Forty Three and Fifty Seven Paisa Only)

¶39

with current and future simple interest @7% per annum w.e.f. 16.08.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover aforesaid amount from 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. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶40

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶41

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 22.08.2023 .

¶42

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.

¶43

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

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Chander Bhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Chander Bhan

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 Sri Bikash Mallick

Canara Bank versus Messers P L Industries Private Limited

Shri Naresh Devidas Mahurkar versus Janata Sahakari Bank Limited

Canara Bank versus Kamdhenu Dairy Firm and Agro Industries

Union Bank of India versus Rs Fitness Planet

State Bank of India versus Mr Pura Bareh