The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application to recover a debt of Rs. 26,91,006/- along with future simple interest at 9% per annum. The order was passed ex parte against the defendant who failed to appear.
Recovery of Rs. 26,91,006/- with simple interest at 9% per annum granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, CHANDIGARH, PRESIDED OVER BY M.M. DHONCHAK
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.437/2023
DATE OF INSTITUTION: 03.03.2023
DATE OF DECISION: 8th DAY OF JUNE, 2023
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 Towers, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara-390007 and its Corporate Office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051 and Branches all over India and one of its Branches situated at Ist Floor, Near N. K. Sharma Office, Chandigarh-Ambala National Highway, Zirakpur, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab, through its Authorised Signatory, Sh. Mohamad Vajid
…..Applicant Bank
Versus
Sh. Satpal Singh S/o Sh. Ram Krishan R/o House No. 1113, Mohinder Nagar, Ambala City, Haryana-134003
…..Defendant
Argued by: Sh. Mohamad Vajid, Manager for the applicant bank Defendant ex parte vide order dated 03.06.2023
FINAL ORDER
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 defendant for recovery of Rs.26,91,006/-
OA/437/2023 ICICI BANK VS SATPAL SINGH
2
(Rupees Twenty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand and Six Only) . The OA has been filed through Sh. Mohamad Vajid, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.09.2019, Annexure-A1 (copy).
It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, a sum of Rs.26,91,006/- (Rupees
Twenty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand and Six Only) is recoverable against the defendant as per statements of accounts dated 22.06.2022,
OA/437/2023 ICICI BANK VS SATPAL SINGH
3
Annexures-A9 and A10 (copy), duly certified under Bankers’ Books Evidence Act.
Since the defendant did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank preferred the present Original Application for issuance of Recovery Certificate.
OA/437/2023 ICICI BANK VS SATPAL SINGH
4
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, purpose of loan, i.e. purchase of vehicles, 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 @9% per annum from the date of filing of the OA till realisation of the amount ordered vide this order. It is ordered accordingly.
OA/437/2023 ICICI BANK VS SATPAL SINGH
5
same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendant. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.
Announced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant bank is entitled to recover the outstanding loan amount from the defendant.
What rate of interest applies to the recoverable amount pending realisation.
Whether an ex parte decision was justified due to the defendant's non-appearance.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
ICICI Bank Limited
Satpal Singh
M.M. Dhonchak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
