Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sushil Kumar and Another

DRT19 Oct 2024OA/207/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant's application for recovery of Rs. 1.66 crore outstanding dues. It directed repayment with uniform simple interest at 8% p.a. and empowered recovery via hypothecated properties under SARFAESI Act or attachment of personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued; Ordering payment of principal sum plus simple interest at 8% p.a.; Authorization to recover via sale of hypothecated properties or attachment of personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sushil Kumar and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.207/2024 PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶3

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 26.02.2024

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: 19.10.2024

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd. having its registered office at near Chakli Circle, Old Parada Raod, Vadodara-390-007, Gujarat, inter alia having a bank branch at Pathankot, Punjab through its Attorney / Authorized Representative Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager.

¶6

……..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sh. Sushil Kumar S/o Sh. Prem Chand R/o Village New Gugran, PO Sujanpur, Pathankot-145023.

¶9

Sh. Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Prem Chand R/o Village New Gugran, PO Sujanpur, Pathankot-145023.

¶10

….. Defendants

¶11

Advocates:

¶12

Argued by Sh. Gulshan Mehta, Advocate proxy for Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for the Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

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.1,65,96,840.00 (Rupees One Crore Sixty Five Lac Ninety Six Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager, Authorised Representative of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide General Power of Attorney dated 18.09.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶15

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of Vehicle Loans and body making loans of Total Rs.2,02,86,551.00 vide Preliminary Credit Facility Forms and Credit Facility Application Forms dated 25.10.2021, 17.11.2021, 11.12.2021, 14.09.2022, 01.07.2022, 05.10.2022, 10.05.2022, 28.03.2019 and 05.04.2021, which are Annexures A2, A3, A5, A6

¶16

¶17

A9, A10, A12, A13, A14, A17, A18, A19, A22, A23, A26, A27, A30 & A31 to this OA. 3. The applicant sanctioned the Vehicle Loans of Total Rs.2,02,86,551.00 vide Sanction Letter to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 had hypothecated Vehicles detailed as:(i) Maker/Model- Creta 1.5 CRDI MT SX Executive bearing Registration No.PB35AA0072, Engine No.D4FAMM403928 and Chassis No.MALPC813LMM244928,

¶18

(ii) Maker/Model: Tata Motors LPS-4018 bearing Registration No. PB04V5099, Engine No. 61G84326501 and Chassis No.MAT447224GAH09224 (iii) Maker/Model: Bharatbenz 5428TT+ bearing Registration No. PB13BQ6472, Engine No. 926956D0136246 and Chassis No. MEC862FCLNP129712 (iv) Maker/Model TATA SIGNA 5530.S bearing Registration No.PB05AQ5572, Engine No.B6.7B6A300D02122F64220923 and Chassis No.MAT828024N3F18256 (V) Maker/Model TATA SIGNA 5530.S bearing Registration No.PB05AQ3772, Engine No.22J84990742 and Chassis No.MAT828024NAJ10101 (vi) Maker/Model: Tata Motors LPS 4018 TC bearing Registration No. PB04AE3772 Engine No. 51G84240045 and Chassis No. MAT447224FSG09559 (vii) Maker/Model Mahindra Bolero Camper PS 2WD bearing Registration No. PB06AV6579, Engine No.TBK4C75478 and Chassis No.MA1RU2TBKK3C92076 (viii) Maker/Model TATA SIGNA 5525.S bearing Registration No. PB04AD5572 Engine No. B6.7B6A250D02112A64137427 and Chassis No.MAT828022M2A00502 vide FOP exhibit, which are Annexures A34 to A41 to this OA and copy of Affidavit of details of vehicle is filed in compliance of order dated 05.12.2022 vide diary no.14277 dated 10.09.2024.

¶19

¶20

Documents executed:-Deed of Hypothecation, all dated 25.10.2021, 17.11.2021, 14.09.2022, 01.07.2022, 05.10.2022, 10.05.2022, 27.03.2019, and 05.04.2021, which are Annexures A4, A7, A11, A15, A20, A24, A28 & A32 to this OA; Irrevocable Power of Attorney all dated 17.12.2021, 01.07.2022, 05.10.2022, 10.05.2022, 28.03.2019 and 05.04.2021 which are Annexures A8, A16, A21, A25, A29 & A33 to this OA; Statement of Accounts & foreclosure statements along with the Certificate regarding the Computer System, which are Annexures A42 to A63 to this OA; Notice & Postal Receipt dated 24.08.2023 and 31.10.2023, which are Annexures A64 & A73 to this OA.

¶21

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in all the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.1,65,96,840.00 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 notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 14.10.2024.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mohammad Vajid, Manager, Authorised Representativ e, ICICI Bank 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 had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A73 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant 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

¶25

¶26

that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,65,96,840.00 (Rupees One Crore Sixty Five Lac Ninety Six Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶27

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed further interest detailed as under:-

¶28

(i) Loan Account No. LAPTK00044791705 interest @7.40%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶29

(ii) Loan Account No. UVPTK00044995965 interest @10.85%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶30

(iii) Loan Account No. LAPTK00046656969 interest @8.25%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶31

(iv) Loan Account No. LVPTK00046019891 interest @8.00%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶32

(v) Loan Account No. LVPTK00046019892 interest @8.00%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶33

(vi) Loan Account No. LVPTK00046570240 interest @8.15%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶34

(vii) Loan Account No. LVPTK00046570241 interest @8.15%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶35

(viii) Loan Account No. UVPTK00045759827 interest @9.50%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶36

(ix) Loan Account No. INPTK00038831896 interest @12.70%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶37

(x) Loan Account No. LVPTIC00043540900 interest @8.70%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶38

(xi) Loan Account No. LVPTK00043540841 interest @8.70%p.a. including penal interest @2%p.a. with monthly rests;

¶39

from 01.12.2023 till the realization.

¶40

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 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

¶41

¶42

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00% 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.1,65,96,840.00 (Rupees One Crore Sixty Five Lac Ninety Six Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Only) Jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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 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.

¶43

Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 30.10.2024. 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: 19.10.2024

¶44

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

Icici Bank Limited v. Sushil Kumar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sushil Kumar and Another

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

Uco Bank versus M/S Aryan Trading Co. and Others

Messrs Kamal Kunj Knitwears and Another versus Uco Bank and Another

Canara Bank versus M/S v Sun Industries and Others

Canara Bank versus Hardial Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Ranjit Singh and Others

Indian Overseas Bank versus Messrs Sri Bhikshu International and Another