Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Navneet Singh

DRT18 Mar 2024OA/1745/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed ICICI Bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act for the recovery of Rs. 28,37,876/- along with interest against two defendants who failed to appear. The court directed the issue of a recovery certificate and the sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,37,876/- with interest @12% p.a. allowed; joint and several liability imposed; Recovery Certificate issued; direction for sale of mortgaged property.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Navneet Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 1745 of 2022 Date of Institution: 06.09.2022 Date of Decision: 18.03.2024

¶4

ICICI Bank Limited at S.C.O No. 237-238, Sector 20, Panchkula, Haryana

¶5

……..Applicant Vs.

¶6

Sh. Navneet Singh s/o Sh. Puran Singh r/o Village Harigarh, Tehsil and District Kurukshetra, Haryana-136128

¶7

Sh. Puran Singh s/o Sh. Gurbaksh Singh r/o Village Bhorak, Tehsil and District Kurukshetra, Haryana-136128

¶8

……….Defendants

¶9

Advocates

¶10

Sh. Kaveesh proxy counsel for Sh. Puneet Tuli, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶11

Defendants-ex parte

¶12

OA for the Recovery of Rs.28,37,876/- with interest @12% per annum with half yearly rests from 11.05.2022.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

ICICI Bank Limited (Applicant Bank) has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.28,37,876/- with interest against Sh. Navneet Singh and Another (defendants).

¶15

Bank’s case is that on 12.02.2019, it had granted a loan of Rs.25,00,000/- to defendants in the form of KCC Facility for agricultural purpose. To secure the loan, defendant No. 2 had mortgaged his property measuring 83 Kanal 18 Marla (fully detailed in para No.3(A) of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @12.10% per annum. On 11.05.2022, a sum of Rs. 28,37,876/- was due from the defendants.

¶16

Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶17

On 01.10.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 06.10.2023, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Parveen Kumar, Manager Legal along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-8. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of Rs.25,00,000/- and on 11.05.2022 a sum of Rs.28,37,876/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs. 28,37,876/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakh Thirty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Six Only) with interest @12% per annum with half yearly rests from 11.05.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of all the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged property fully detailed in para No. 3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property of the defendants. 7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 22.04.2024, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgage property and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶18

A copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open court (A S Narang) Dated: 18.03.2024 Presiding Officer DRT-2, Chandigarh (Additional charge)

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Navneet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Navneet 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

Bank of Maharashtra versus Vinod Kumar Chaturvedi

The Federal Bank Limited versus Sri. Johney @ John Chacko

Karnataka Vikas Grameena Bank versus Venkappa Bhimappa Lamani (Since deceased by his legal Representatives)

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Om Anand Enterprises

Atma Ram versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited

Narinder Singh versus the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited