Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Hemanth v

DRT21 Feb 2024OA/571/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited to recover outstanding dues totaling Rs. 27,35,388.12 plus interest against three defendants who defaulted on commercial vehicle and working capital loans. The Tribunal issued a final order mandating payment and recovery from personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,35,388.12 with interest; liberty to sell personal assets for balance dues; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Hemanth v — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 21^st Day of February 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA

¶4

Hon’ble Presiding Officer

¶5

OA NO.571/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

ICICI BANK LIMITED

¶8

4/10, Mythree Tower, Bommanahalli, Hosur Main Road, Benglauru-68.

¶9

Represented through its Constituted Attorney Sri Pramodh.G. … APPLICANT

¶10

AND:

¶11

1. Hemanth V, S/o. Vinodhara, Aged about 33 Years, Residing at #2-119, Girigudde House, Jakribettu, B Kasaba,

¶12

Near Jakribettu Bus Stand, Bantwala, Dakshin Kannada - 574 211.

¶13

2. Vinodhara, S/o. Late Koch Poojary, Aged about 71 Years, Residing at #2-119, Girigudde House, Jakribettu, B Kasaba, Near Jakribettu Bus Stand, Bantwala, Dakshin Kannada - 574 211.

¶14

3. Monappa K, S/o. Batyappa Moolya, Aged about 59 Years, Residing at 1-334, Kabaka, Puttur Town, Near Government School, Dakshin Kannada - 574 220. …DEFENDANTS

¶15

¶16

OA No.571/2022

¶17

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶18

Applicant : Vidhii Partners

¶19

Defendants Nos.1 to 3 : Ex-parte.

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 31-03-2022 under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,35,388.12/-(Rupees Twenty Seven

¶22

Lakhs Thirty Five Thousand Three Hundred and Eighty Eight Paisa Twelve only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing till realization from defendants.

¶23

The application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed

¶24

under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

¶25

Brief facts of the case:

¶26

The 1st Defendant is being as Borrower for the debts disbursed under the commercial vehicle loans provided by the Original Applicant. The defendant Nos.2 & 3 have signed as co-applicants to the applications made by Defendant No.1. The Defendants intended to purchase a vehicle in the name and style of Ashok Leyland 2818 for their commercial purpose and had approached the Applicant Bank for the financial facility of a commercial vehicle loan. The Defendants have submitted 2 preliminary credit facility

¶27

¶28

OA No.571/2022

¶29

application forms for the purchase of Ashok Leyland 2818 which are bearing Nos.CB 000 272256 and CB 000 272258. The Preliminary Credit Facility

¶30

Application Forms and Credit Facility Application dated 30.07.2019

¶31

The Defendants vide credit facility application form dated 30.07.2019 inter alia agreed that:

¶32

i) They shall repay the facility and interest thereon in the manner and on the dates specified thereto;

¶33

ii) Terms of repayment 60 months.

¶34

iii) EMI of Rs.58,898/- per month for 60 months under said loan account.

¶35

iv) Date of commencement of EMI was 01.10.2019 & the Due Date for payment of each EMI was on 1st day of each month

¶36

The Defendants agreed to pay a fixed rate of interest at 11.68% p.a. on the principal amount. The Applicant states that the above loan was accordingly disbursed in favour of the defendant No.1. The Defendants initially made payments as agreed, however, the Defendants failed and neglected to continue to do the same from 1st January 2022.

¶37

The Applicant further states that the Applicant was left with no other option but to issue a recall Notice dated 15.11.2021 the Defendants inter alia calling upon the Defendants to pay a sum of ₹24,29,306/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Lakhs Twenty-Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Six Only) along with interest & other charges etc. as on 11^th November 2021 and

¶38

¶39

OA No.571/2022

¶40

further informed the Defendants that incase of the failure to repay the outstanding amount, the Applicant shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶41

A Foreclosure statement was issued on 19^th January 2022 reflecting upon the liability of the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.22,14,411.12/(Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Eleven and Twelve paise Only) as on 19.01.2022 plus applicable interest, penal interest, premia, charges etc. thereon at contractual rates and further informed the Defendant that in case of the failure to repay the outstanding amount.

¶42

The Defendants 1 & 2 intended to purchase a used vehicle for commercial purpose and had approached the Applicant Bank for the financial facility of a commercial vehicle loan under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme to purchase the same. In reference of borrowing the same amount the 1^st & 2^nd defendants have submitted preliminary credit facility application form No. CB 999 379810.

¶43

The Applicant Bank has issued a sanction letter dated 03.09.2020 sanctioning loan of Rs.5,06,000/- under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme as a Working Capital Term Loan and the amount sanctioned was disbursed to the account of the defendants. In reference to the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme the 1st defendant has given a selfundertaking to the applicant bank. Pursuant to the aforesaid sanction, the defendants inter alia agreed that:

¶44

¶45

OA No.571/2022

¶46

a) Terms of repayment: 4 years from the date of disbursement. b) The opposite parties agreed to pay a fixed rate of interest at 9.25% p.a. on the principal amount.

¶47

It is submitted that in reference of sanction letter dated 3.9.2020 the defendants have given an undertaking to the applicant bank undertaking to create effective security in favour of the applicant bank as stipulated. The defendants initially made payments as agreed under the Facility Agreement. However, the opposite parties failed and neglected to continue to do the same since 22.10.2021. The applicant states that the defendants failed and neglected to make payment to the applicant despite repeated follow ups.

¶48

The Applicant further states that the Applicant was left with no other option but to issue a recall Notice dated 15.11.2021 in respect to used commercial vehicle loan account bearing No.UVMNG00042027980 to the Defendants inter alia calling upon the Defendants to pay a sum of ₹5,24,946/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Twenty-Four Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-Six Only) along with interest & other charges etc. as on 11^th November 2021 and further informed the Defendants that incase of their failure to repay the outstanding amount. In view of the continued default on the part of the Defendants in repayment of the outstanding dues. Calling upon the Defendant to repay the outstanding balance. However, there was no positive response from the defendant. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶49

¶50

OA No.571/2022

¶51

After the filing of OA, summons was sent to the Defendants 1 to 3 during the month of June 2022 by RPAD with Acknowledgement produced When OA was taken up on 10.07.2023, even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants, hence, Defendants No.1 to 3 was placed ex-parte on 10.07.2023.

¶52

Heard the submissions of Counsels and perused the records.

¶53

To prove the case, Mr.Pramod G. aged Major, Collection Manager of the Applicant Bank, has filed Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A22. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶54

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, documents executed, the conduct and operations in the loan account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a final order on the following terms:-

¶55

: O R D E R:

¶56

15. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶57

a) The Applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendants No.1 to 3 jointly or severally to pay a sum of Rs. 27,35,388.12/ - with interest @ 11.68 % from 20.01.2022 being the aggregate amount outstanding and payable under the Loan account Nos.

¶58

¶59

OA No.571/2022

¶60

LVMNG00040179230 & UVMNG00042027980 together with

¶61

contractual interest till the date of realization.

¶62

(b) The applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movables and immovables) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶63

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

¶64

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

¶65

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶66

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶67

[Dictated to the (GS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on this the 21^st day February 2024].

¶68

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

Sd/-

OA No.571/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶74

AW-1: Its Area Debt Manager, Sri.Rohit Ali.M. of the Applicant Bank.

¶75

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶76

Sl. No.	Documents	Exhibits
1.	Quotation for Ashok Leyland 2818	A3
2.	Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form No. CB 000 272256	A4
3.	Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form No. CB 000 272258	A5
4.	Credit Facility Application Form	A6
5.	Key Facts statement and most important information	A7
6.	Loan Recall Notice to the 1^stdefendant in respect of Loan Account No. LVMNG00040179230.	A8
7.	Loan Recall Notice to the 2^nddefendant in respect of Loan Account No. LVMNG00040179230.	A9
8.	Loan Recall Notice to the 3^rddefendant in respect of Loan Account No. LVMNG00040179230.	A10
9.	Foreclosure Statement in respect of Loan Account No. LVMNG40179230.	A11
10.	Loan Account statement in respect of Loan Account No. LVMNG40179230.	A12
11.	Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form No. CB 999 379810	A13
12.	Sanction Letter	A14

¶77

¶78

OA No.571/2022

¶79

13.	Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme – Self Undertaking by the borrower	A15
14.	Certificate	A16
15.	Undertaking in relation to Security	A17
16.	Loan Recall Notice to the 1^stdefendant in respect of Loan Account No. UVMNG00042027980.	A18
17.	Loan Recall Notice to the 2^nddefendant in respect of Loan Account No. UVMNG00042027980.	A19
18.	Loan Recall Notice to the 3^rddefendant in respect of Loan Account No. UVMNG00042027980.	A20
19.	Foreclosure Statement in respect of Loan Account No. UVMNG00042027980.	A21
20.	Loan Account statement in respect of Loan Account No. UVMNG00042027980.	A22

¶80

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶81

-Nil –

¶82

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶83

-Nil –

¶84

SCHEDULE OF MOVABLES HYPOTHECATED BY THE DEFENDANTS

¶85

Commercial Vehicle Bearing No.KA19 AC9243

¶86

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Hemanth v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Hemanth v

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

Sithin N P versus Uco Bank

Bank of India versus M/s Itihaas Printers

Bank of India versus M/s Green Vista

Syndicate Bank versus M/S P J News & Information Bureau Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Abdul Haneez

Icici Bank Limited versus Unity Travel Rep by Its Prop Sri.Mugure Gowda.D.

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Sithin N P versus Uco Bank

Bank of India versus M/s Itihaas Printers

Bank of India versus M/s Green Vista

Syndicate Bank versus M/S P J News &amp; Information Bureau Pvt. Ltd.

Canara Bank versus Abdul Haneez

Icici Bank Limited versus Unity Travel Rep by Its Prop Sri.Mugure Gowda.D.

Syndicate Bank versus M/S P J News & Information Bureau Pvt. Ltd.