Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Bnsonavane Infra Private Limted

DRT11 Jan 2024OA/458/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex parte application filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. for recovery of term and working capital loans, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the claim after examining bank documents as defendants failed to appear. The tribunal adjusted the claim by deducting alleged cheque bounce charges and reduced future interest to 9% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to jointly or severally pay Rs.37,81,077/- with future interest @9% p.a. from 15.01.2022; property hypothecated sold if dues not realized; Recovery Certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Bnsonavane Infra Private Limted — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

Presented on: 15.01.2022 Registered on: 04.05.2022 Decided on: 11.01.2024 Duration: Y M D 1 11 26

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.458/2022

¶3

ICICI Bank Ltd.

¶4

A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakali Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara-390 007 and having one of their Branchy Offices at 870/01, Suma House, 1^st Floor, Bhandarkar Institute Road, Pune-411 005.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

BN Sonavane Infra Private Limited, A Private Limited Company having Office at-Flat No.7, Third Floor, Scheme 11, Sec. 21, Nigdi, Kounteya CHS, Building 52, Swagat, Yamunanagar, Pune-411 044.

¶8

Mr. Bhushan Namdev Sonavane, Age-32 years, Occu-Business, R/at- No.52, 1, Yamunanagar, Triveni Nagar Chowk, Nigdi, Pune-411 044.

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 1 of 8

[ npb ]

Also at:Acqa Mist CHS, Flat No.505, Floor No.5, Ganesh Nagar Pipeline Road, Ravet, Pune-412 101.

¶13

Mr. Namdev Tukaram Sonavane, Age-57 years, Occu-Business, R/at- No.52, 1, Yamunanagar, Triveni Nagar Chowk, Nigdi, Pune-411 044. Also at:Acqa Mist CHS, Flat No.505, Floor No.5, Ganesh Nagar Pipeline Road, Ravet, Pune-412 101. 4. Mr. Ankush Dattatray Dhore, Age-39 years, Occu-Business, Flat No.7, Third Floor, Scheme 11, Sec. 21, Nigdi, Kounteya CHS, Building 52, Swagat, Yamunanagar, Pune-411 044. … Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES For the Applicant Mr. Ruwikk V. Dhekale - Advocate For Defendants Ex parte

¶15

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.37,94,327/-

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

(Delivered on 11^th January, 2024)

¶18

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of Rs.37,94,327/- i.e. Rs.31,86,125/- in respect of Term Loan account together with future interest @11% per

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 2 of 8

[ npb ]

annum with monthly rests and Rs.6,08,202/- towards Working Capital Term Loan account together with future interest @9.25% per annum with monthly rests thereon from 15^th January, 2022 repayment/realization of entire dues from the defendants.

¶23

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶24

The defendant No.1 is a Private Limited Company and defendants Nos.2 and 3 are its Directors. Defendant No.4 is a personal guarantor.

¶25

On 09^th October, 2019, the defendant No.1, through defendant Nos.2 and 3, being principal borrower approached the applicant Bank seeking Term Loan facility of Rs.30,59,006/- for purchase of Commercial Vehicle i.e. Ashok Leyland Ltd. Model No.2518C/4 having registration No.MH14-HU-6001.

¶26

On 09.10.2019 the applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed Term Loan of Rs.30,59,006/- to defendant No.1. Defendant No.4 stood as personal guarantor for the said Term Loan. The Term Loan was to be repaid with interest @11% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶27

The defendants executed loan transaction and security

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 3 of 8

[ npb ]

documents in favour of the applicant Bank as mentioned in paragraph No.5.5 (a) to (c) of the Original Application, including Deed of Hypothecation dated 24^th September, 2019.

¶32

The applicant Bank contended that on 31^st July, 2020 defendant No.1 through defendant No.3 again approached it seeking Working Capital Term Loan of Rs.5,82,709/- for meeting the working capital requirements and creation of current assets under the Emergency Credit Line Guaranteed Scheme (ECLGS). The applicant Bank sanctioned and disbursed the Working Capital Term Loan which was to be repaid in 48 installments from the date of disbursement along with interest @ 9.25% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶33

The defendants executed Hypothecation Deed in favour of the applicant Bank towards security for repayment of the said WC Term Loan.

¶34

The applicant Bank contended that after availing two Term Loans, defendant No.1 failed to pay the monthly interest and installments. Even after repeated requests from the applicant Bank to regularize the loan accounts,

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 4 of 8

[ npb ]

defendants ignored and avoided to repay the Term Loans.

¶39

Therefore, the applicant Bank has classified the loan accounts of defendant No.1 as Non-Performing Asset on 22^nd March, 2021.

¶40

Thereafter, the applicant Bank issued Demand Notice dated 06^th September, 2021 calling upon defendants to repay the amount outstanding. Despite issuance of Demand Notice, defendants failed to adhere to the demands made by the applicant Bank.

¶41

Hence, this application is filed.

¶42

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceed ex parte against them vide Order dated 09^th February, 2023 below the Application (Exhibit-1).

¶43

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exhibit-7) of Mr. Rushikesh Murlidhar Pandit, Authorized Signatory which supports the case of the applicant Bank elucidated in the application.

¶44

The applicant Bank has produced on record the original of loan transaction documents (Sr.Nos.AW-1/1 to AW-1/9)

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 5 of 8

[ npb ]

which corroborate the case of the applicant Bank.

¶49

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the applicant Bank.

¶50

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve evidence of the applicant Bank. Therefore, the applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶51

The applicant Bank has claimed Cheque Bouncing Charges of Rs.10,738 in Term Loan account and Rs.2,512/- in Working Capital Term Loan account which cannot be allowed and both these amounts are required to be deducted from the respective total claim amounts. Thus, the aggregate claim amount is reduced from Rs.37,94,327/to Rs.37,81,077/-.

¶52

The applicant Bank has claimed future interest @11% p.a. with monthly rests for Term Loan account and 9.25% p.a. with monthly rests for Working Capital Term Loan account. However, considering facts of the case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple) for both the loan account, it would be just and reasonable rate of

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 6 of 8

[ npb ]

interest.

Hence, I pass the following order:-

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(A) Original Application No.458/2022 is allowed with costs.

¶60

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 4 shall either jointly or severally pay to the applicant Bank the aggregate sum of Rs.37,81,077/- (Rupees Thirty-Seven Lakhs Eighty-One Thousand and Seventy-Seven only) together with future interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 15^th January, 2022 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶61

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by the valid and subsisting hypothecation of the movable property i.e. Commercial Vehicle i.e. Ashok Leyland Ltd. Model No.2518 C/4 having registration No.MH14-HU-6001, more particularly mentioned in paragraph No.5.3 of the Original Application.

¶62

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the

(OA No.458/2022)

Page 7 of 8

[ npb ]

mortgaged property to recover its dues.

¶67

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate. (F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant Bank and defendants.

¶68

Sd/(Dilip G Murumkar) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune

¶69

Place : Pune Date : 11.01.2024

¶70

(OA No.458/2022)

¶71

Page 8 of 8

¶72

[ npb ]

Icici Bank Limited v. Bnsonavane Infra Private Limted

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Bnsonavane Infra Private Limted

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus M/S Shree Motors Prop. Prakash Sakharam Sawant

Union Bank of India versus Sharmila Patil

Bank of India versus Shukracharya Mulik

Bank of Maharashtra versus Nagarbai

Idbi Bank versus Sandesh

Federal Bank versus Netaji Yadav