Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Dkr Logistics & Ors.

DRT24 Jan 2023OA/741/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by ICICI Bank against borrowers for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 36.91 lakhs. The court, exercising discretion regarding interest rates in light of prevailing conditions, granted uniform simple interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 36,91,075.20 plus simple interest @9% per annum w.e.f. 28.03.2022; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Dkr Logistics & Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.741/2022

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 28.03.2022

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 23^rd DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited , a body corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949 and having its registered office at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodra and its corporate office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai and having Branches all over India and one of its Branches situated at 1^st Floor, Near N.K. Sharma Office, Chandigarh-Ambala National Highway, Zirakpur, Punjab, through its authorised Signatory, Sh. Mohd. Vajid

¶6

…..Applicant Bank

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. M/s DKR Logistics through its Proprietor, Ground Floor, PVC Road, TikriKalan, South West, Delhi

¶9

2. Sh. Ashwani Kumar S/o Sh. Satish Kumar, Proprietor M/s DKR Logistics R/o House No. 566/4, Gali No. 3, Shankar Garden Line, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana

¶10

3. Sh. Satish Sangwan S/o Sh. Rajender Singh R/o House No. 566/4, Gali No. 3, Shankar Garden Line, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, Haryana

¶11

…..Defendants

¶12

Argued by: Sh. Sukhwinder Singh proxy counsel for Sh. Rahul Garg counsel for the applicant bank Defendants ex parte vide order dated 28.10.2022

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank

¶15

under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and

¶16

OA NO.741/2022 ICICI BANK VS M/S DKR LOGISTICS AND OTHERS 2

¶17

Financial Institutions Act, 1993(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity) against the defendants for recovery of Rs.36,91,075.20/-

¶18

(Rupees Thirty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand Seventy Five and Twenty Paisa only) . It has been filed through, Sh. Mohd. Vajid, Authorised Signatory of the applicant bank, stated to be competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 18.09.2019, Annexure-A1 (copy).

¶19

The brief facts as per Original Application are that defendants had approached the applicant bank for grant of term loan of Rs. 30,78,000/and Emergency Credit Line Guaranteed Scheme (ECLGS) facility of Rs. 11,58,000/- vide preliminary credit facility application forms, Annexures-A2 and A7 (copy).

¶20

The applicant bank sanctioned the above said loan facilities to defendants vide credit facility application form dated 09.10.2019, Annexure-A3 (copy) and sanction letter dated 18.07.2020, Annexure-A8 (copy) as per the terms and conditions which were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶21

In order to secure the aforementioned credit facilities, defendants executed various loan and security documents, i.e. deeds of hypothecation, Annexures-A4 and A9 (copy) and registration documents of vehicles, Annexures-A5 and A6 (copy).

¶22

It is further the case of the applicant bank that the loan facilities were duly availed of by the defendants but they failed to maintain the financial discipline of the applicant bank and resultantly, the loan accounts became irregular because those were declared NPA. The applicant bank recalled the entire outstanding amount vide recall notices dated 04.09.2021, 29.09.2021 and 01.10.2021, Annexures-A10 to A12 (copy), but to no avail.

¶23

OA NO.741/2022 ICICI BANK VS M/S DKR LOGISTICS AND OTHERS 3

¶24

It is further the case of the applicant bank that after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan accounts, a sum of Rs.36,91,075.20/- (Rupees Thirty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand Seventy Five and Twenty Paisa only) is recoverable against the defendants as per statements of accounts duly certified under Banker’s Books Evidence Act, Annexures-A13 to A17 (copy).

¶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 despite service, thus, the defendants were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 28.10.2022 .

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

It was argued by the learned counsel that in view of unrebutted documentary evidence brought on record, the applicant bank had proved its case for recovery of the amount sought against the defendants. From perusal of Annexures-A1 to A17, it is clear that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them after they 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

¶30

OA NO.741/2022 ICICI BANK VS M/S DKR LOGISTICS AND OTHERS 4

¶31

Rs.36,91,075.20/- (Rupees Thirty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand

¶32

Seventy Five and Twenty Paisa only) from the defendants.

¶33

In so far as pendente lite and future interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @24% per annum with monthly rests. In credit facility application form dated 09.10.2019, Annexure-A3 (copy) and sanction letter dated 18.07.2020, Annexure-A8 (copy), the rate of interest has been mentioned @10.05% per annum and @9.25% per annum, respectively.

¶34

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. vehicle, 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 final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶35

In the result, the Original Application is allowed with costs declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant bank a sum Rs.36,91,075.20/- (Rupees Thirty Six lacs Ninety One Thousand Seventy Five and Twenty Paisa only) with current and future simple interest @9% per annum , w.e.f. 28.03.2022 , till the date of realisation of the amount. The liability of the defendants shall be joint as well as several. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, applicant bank shall be at liberty to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets/properties of the defendants. The applicant bank is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶36

OA NO.741/2022 ICICI BANK VS M/S DKR LOGISTICS AND OTHERS

¶37

¶38

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶39

Parties to appear before Recovery Officer concerned on 14.03.2023.

¶40

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

¶41

Announced in the open Tribunal (M.M. Dhonchak) Presiding Officer

¶42

DRT-2,Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Dkr Logistics & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Dkr Logistics & Ors.

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

State Bank of India versus Ms Taj Agencies

Ms Vishnu Beej Bhandar versus State Bank of India

Ms Morinda Rice and General Mills versus State Bank of India

Bank of Baroda versus M/s Pushplata Kumari and Others

State Bank of India versus M/S Shiv Shakti Feed Industries

Canara Bank versus Smt Sherry Khurana