Allowed

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Amandeep Singh and Others

DRT27 Mar 2024OA/1622/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by ICICI Bank against borrowers and a guarantor. It directed the recovery of Rs. 31,93,145 with interest at 9.25% p.a. and authorized recovery through hypothecated properties or personal assets under the SARFAESI Act. Order was passed ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 31,93,145 along with costs and simple interest at 9.25% p.a. authorized for sale of hypothecated or personal assets.

Icici Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Amandeep Singh and Others — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1622/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 22.09.2022 DATE OF DECISION: 27.03.2024 ICICI Bank Ltd., having its registered office at Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara-390007, Gujarat interalia having a branch at Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana through its attorney/authorized representative, Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager ……..Applicant Versus 1. Sh. Amandeep Singh S/o Sh. Amarjit Singh, R/o Dashmesh Nagar, Machhiwara Khas, Ludhiana-141115 2. Sh. Amarjit Singh S/o Sh. Lal Singh, R/o Dashmesh Nagar, Machhiwara Khas, Ludhiana-141115 (Borrowers) 3. Sh. Pritpal Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o Tanda Kushal Singh Panjgarain, Samrala, District Ludhiana-141115 (Guarantor) ….……Defendants Advocates: Argued by Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the applicant Defendants are ex-parte FINAL ORDER 1. Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.31,93,145.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Ninety Three Thousand One Hundred and Forty Five only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.09.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶5

¶6

2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant Nos.1 and 2 had
approached the applicant bank for the grant of Vehicle Loan-I of
Rs.18,01,393.00, Vehicle Loan-II of Rs.21.50 Lacs vide Preliminary
credit facility applications form and Credit Facility Application forms
dated 26.11.2019 and 06.01.2021, which areAnnexures A2, A3, A7 and A8to this OA. The Defendants no.1 and 2 again approached the applicant bank
for the grant of GECL facility of Rs.3.30 Lacs vide Preliminary Credit
Facility Application Form dated 29.07.2020, which isAnnexure A14to this OA.
3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the Vehicle Loan-I of
Rs.18,01,393.00 and Vehicle Loan-II of Rs.21.50 Lacs; and the terms
and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. The applicant bank also sanctioned a GECL facility of Rs.3.30 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 29.07.2020, which isAnnexure A15to this
OA.
4. Defendant No.1 had hypothecated his movable properties i.e.
a) Vehicle namely TATA ULTRA EX 1918 having Engine No. 5LNGDICR17JPY508220, Chassis No. MAT764114K7J18452 and
bearing Registration No. PB10HG9867 vide Deed of
Hypothecation dated 26.11.2019, which isAnnexure A4to this OA;
b) Vehicle namely Bharat Benz 1617R having Engine No.
400932D0032912, Chassis No. MEC7784CJLP045923 and
bearing Registration No. PB10HN2367 vide Deed of
Hypothecation dated 06.01.2021, which isAnnexure A9to this OA.
Documents executed:- Irrevocable power of attorney and Deed of
guarantee both dated 26.11.2019, which areAnnexures A5 and A6to
this OA; Irrevocable power of attorney and Deed of guarantee both
dated 06.01.2021, which areAnnexures A10 and A11to this OA;

¶7

¶8

FOP’s, which are Annexures A12 and A13 to this OA; Hypothecation deed and Deed of guarantee both dated 29.07.2020, which are Annexures A16 and A17 to this OA; Notice and postal receipts dated 01.07.2022, which are Annexures A18 and A19 to this OA and Statements of account and foreclosure statement of loan along with Certificate regarding the computer system and the genuineness of the statement of account, which are Annexures A20 to A25 to this OA. 5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.31,93,145.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 6. The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 18.03.2024. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned 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 A25 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.31,93,145.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Ninety Three Thousand One Hundred and Forty Five only) along

¶9

¶10

with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.78%p.a. in the Vehicle Loan-I, @10.01%p.a. in Vehicle Loan-II and @9.25%p.a. in GECL with monthly rests plus @2%p.a. penal interest, in all, from the date of filing of this OA till the realization.

¶11

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 defendants, quantum of loan 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 @9.25%p.a. in all the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.31,93,145.00 (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Ninety Three Thousand One Hundred and Forty Five only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @9.25%p.a. in all the loan accounts 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 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.

¶12

¶13

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 03.04.2024. 15. Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant bank 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.

¶14

Dated: 27.03.2024

¶15

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

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Amandeep Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Amandeep Singh and Others

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 versus M/s Kartar Singh Khaira and Company And Others

Canara Bank versus M/S Vinjul Enterprises and Another

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Luxmi Metal Industries and Others

Central Bank of India versus Smt. Narinder Kaur and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Amandeep Singh and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Jugraj Singh and another