Allowed

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Simranjeet Singh Gill and Others

DRT12 Apr 2024OA/1736/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an ex-parte application by ICICI Bank to recover Rs. 52,69,270.62 from borrowers and a guarantor. The court granted uniform simple interest at 10% per annum and ordered recovery from mortgaged properties or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 52,69,270.62 with 10% p.a. simple interest. Order to recover from mortgaged properties or personal assets by attachment and sale as per SARFAESI Act.

Icici Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Simranjeet Singh Gill and Others — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1736/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 30.08.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 12.04.2024

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd., 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 Village Jhandewala, Tehsil Moga, District Moga, Punjab, Pin-142001, through its Manager and authorized signatory Mr. Parveen Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Simranjeet Singh Gill S/o Sh. Charanjeet Singh Gill, R/o Village Ghal Kalan, Tehsil & District Moga, Punjab-142048

¶10

Sh. Balpreet Singh Gill S/o Sh. Charanjeet Singh Gill R/o Village Ghal Kalan, Tehsil & District Moga, Punjab-142048 (Borrowers/Mortgagors)

¶11

Sh. Jaswinder Singh S/o Balvir Singh R/o Village Bukhanwala, Tehsil & District Moga, Punjab-142048 (Guarantor)

¶12

………Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Sh. Himender Pal Singh, Advocate for the Applicant (through VC) Defendants are ex-parte FINAL ORDER 1. 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 defendants for recovery of Rs.52,69,270.62p (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Seventy and Paisa Sixty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Parveen Kumar, Manager of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide

¶15

¶16

General Power of Attorney dated 09.03.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.48.00 Lacs vide Farmer Finance Facilities Credit Facility Application Form ‘CFAF’ dated 10.05.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.41.00 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 30.06.2016, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants No.1 and 2 had mortgaged their immovable property i.e. Total land measuring 43K-00M situated at Village Ghal Kalan Patti Dandu, Tehsil and District Moga, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural credit operation & Misc. provisions (Banks) Act,1978 and Letter to Sub Registrar dated 05.09.2016, which are Annexures A6 and A7 to this OA. Documents executed:- Deed of hypothecation, Deed of Guarantee both dated 29.06.2016, which are Annexures A4 & A5 to this OA; Notices dated 11.04.2022 and Postal Receipts, which are Annexures A8 & A9 to this OA and Statement of account along with Certificate regarding the computer system and the genuineness of statement of account being prepared through computer system, which is Annexure A10 to this OA. 5. 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.52,69,270.62p, 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 11.03.2024.

¶18

¶19

7.	In support of the OA,	affidavit ofSh. Parveen Kumar, Manager,
ICICI	Bank has been filed.

¶20

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing 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 A10 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 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.52,69,270.62p (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Seventy and Paisa Sixty Two 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. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. and Penal Interest @2%p.a. from 14.06.2022 till the realization.

¶21

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 @10.00%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.

¶22

¶23

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.52,69,270.62p (Rupees Fifty Two Lacs Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Seventy and Paisa Sixty Two only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%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 personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶24

Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶25

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶26

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this

¶27

Tribunal on 24.04.2024.

¶28

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.

¶29

Pronounced by me in the Open Tribunal . Dated: 12.04.2024

¶30

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

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Simranjeet Singh Gill and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Simranjeet Singh Gill 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

Union Bank of India versus M/s Juneja Print Pac

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Ajay Kumar Juneja and Another

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Another

Icici Bank Ltd. versus M/s Bansal Trading Co. and Others

Icici Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Parminder Singh