Allowed

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parminder Singh

DRT20 Apr 2024OA/442/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-III, Chandigarh allowed the Original Application filed by ICICI Bank against two borrowers for recovery of Rs. 21,04,322.00. The court declared the defendants liable to pay the principal amount along with simple interest at 10% p.a. and authorized recovery through sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

decreeing payment of Rs. 21,04,322.00 jointly and severally with simple interest @10% p.a.; recovery via mortgage sale or attachment; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.442/2023

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.03.2023

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 20.04.2024

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd., having its registered office at Land Mark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390007 and having its Branch Office at S.C.O. 237238, Sector 20, Panchkula through its Authorized Representative Sh. Parveen Kumar.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Parminder Singh S/o Sh. Shamsher Singh, R/o Sangrana, Muktsar, Muktsar, Punjab (Borrower)

¶10

Smt. Jaspreet Kaur W/o Sh. Shamsher Singh, R/o Sangrana, Muktsar, Muktsar, Punjab (Co-Borrower)

¶11

………Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Sh. Kaveesh, Advocate for the Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

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.21,04,322.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Four Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty Two only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Parveen Kumar, Authorized Representative of the applicant bank, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 09.03.2021, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶16

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.13.00

¶17

¶18

Lacs vide Farmer Finance Facilities Credit Facility Application Form ‘CFAF’ dated 03.06.2017, which are Annexures A2 to this OA. 3. The applicant Bank sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.11.50 Lacs for the 1^st year and Rs.12,99,900/- for the 5^th year vide Sanction Letter dated 20.06.2017 and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. total land measuring 40K-08M detailed as:a) Land measuring 29K-06M owned by defendant No.1 and b) Land measuring 11K-02M Bigha owned by defendant No.2 situated at Village Sangrana, Hadbast no.141, Tehsil and District Sri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4(1) and Letter to subregistrar for creating charge bearing mortgage no.541 both dated 21.06.2016, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA. Documents executed: - Hypothecation Deed dated 19.06.2017, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Demand notices dated 27.01.2023 with postal receipts, which are Annexures A6 and A7 to this OA and Statement of account, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶19

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.21,04,322.00, 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.

¶20

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 14.02.2024.

¶21

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Sh. Parveen Kumar, Authorized officer, ICICI Bank Ltd. has 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,

¶22

¶23

the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A8 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.21,04,322.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Four Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty 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.

¶24

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant bank in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50%p.a. plus Penal Interest @2%p.a. from the date of institution of this OA till the realization.

¶25

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. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.21,04,322.00 (Rupees Twenty One Lacs Four Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty Two only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @10.00%p.a. in the loan account

¶26

¶27

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. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 29.04.2024. 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 . Dated: 20.04.2024

¶28

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

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parminder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Sh. Parminder 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

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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Another

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

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Ranjit Singh

Canara Bank versus Sh. Bohar Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Bansal Rice Mill and Others