Allowed

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Pragat Singh

DRT11 Dec 2024OA/1423/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed under the RDBFI Act, 1993. It held the defendants jointly and severally liable to repay the outstanding loan amount of ₹20,77,290 along with costs and uniform simple interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Declaration of liability to pay ₹20,77,290 with costs and simple interest at 8% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Icici Bank Ltd. versus Pragat Singh — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1423/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 27.07.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.12.2024

¶6

ICICI BANK LTD, having its Registered Office at: Land Mark, race course circle, Vadodara, 390007 and having its Branch Office at: SCO. 237-238, Sector-20, Panchkula. Through its Authorised Representative Sh. Parveen Kumar

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Pragat Singh S/o Sh. Mahinder Singh, H.No. 249, Village Bhatiwaal Kalan, Tehsil and Distt. Sangrur-148026

¶10

Smt. Lavpreet Kaur W/o Sh. Pragat Singh, H.No. 249, Village Bhatiwaal Kalan, Tehsil and Distt. Sangrur-148026

¶11

Sh. Lakhvir Singh S/o Sh. Harvinder Singh, Village Bharej, Tehsil and Distt. Sangrur -148026

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Ms. Pinki, Advocate Proxy for Sh. Gagandeep Toni, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendant for recovery of Rs.20,77,290.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Parveen Kumar, Authorised Representative o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 09.03.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs.16.00 Lacs vide Loan application dated 17.11.2015, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶17

¶18

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs.16.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.11.2015, which is Annexure A3 to this OA, and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶19

Defendants had mortgaged his immovable property i.e. total land measuring 41B-5B situated at Bhatiwaal Kalan, H.B. No. 53, Tehsil and Distt. Sangrur vide Letter to Sub Registrar for creating the charge and Declaration under section 4(1) dated 26.11.2015, which are Annexures A6 & A7 to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed:- Hypothecation Deed dated 17.11.2015, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Agreement of Guarantee dated 27.11.2015, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Copy of notice dated 06.12.2021, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and Statement of Account with certificate dated 25.11.2021, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶21

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.20,77,290.00 which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶22

The defendants were served notice to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 15.12.2024.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Parveen Kumar, Authorised Representative, ICICI Bank Ltd. h as been filed. 8. Heard arguments and perused record.

¶24

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back

¶25

¶26

the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.20,77,290.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. plus penal interest @2.00%p.a. from 26.11.2021 till the realization.

¶28

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendant, quantum of loans and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a.in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶29

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,77,290.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Seventy Seven Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the bank still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of

¶30

¶31

personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 27.01.2025 15. Copy of this order be given Dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 11.12.2024

¶32

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Pragat Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Pragat Singh

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

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sikha Jain

Punjab National Bank versus Kanwaljit Kaur

Idfc First Bank Ltd. versus Amritpal Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Jagtar Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Kulwinder Singh

Punjab National Bank versus Lakhvir Alias Lakhveer Singh