Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapur

DRT19 Mar 2024OA/837/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-II, Bengaluru allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited for recovery of loan dues amounting to approximately Rs. 97.24 lakhs from borrowers who defaulted on a home loan. The Tribunal observed the Application was within limitation and the defendants failed to appear, granting the bank permission to recover dues via sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant bank was allowed to recover Rs. 97,24,643.40 along with future interest at 24% p.a. from the defendants by selling the scheduled mortgaged properties or personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sri. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapur — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th day of March 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA Hon’ble Presiding Officer

¶4

OA NO.837/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

ICICI Bank Limited., Mytree Centre, No.4/10, Hosur Road, Bommannahalli, Bangalore- 560 068. Rep. by its officer and Power of Attorney Mr. Premjith.R

¶7

…APPLICANT

¶8

AND

¶9

Mr. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapur S/o Rishikesh Shivarao Kalyanapura A - 3, 301, Shree Prakruthi Apartments Thindlu Main Road Kodigehalli, Bengaluru - 560097

¶10

Mrs. Srikala Kalyanur

¶11

W/o. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapura

¶12

A - 3, 301, Shree Prakruthi Apartments Thindlu Main Road Kodigehalli, Bengaluru – 560097.

¶13

… DEFENDANTS

¶14

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶15

Applicant : Anvaya Law

¶16

Defendants Nos.1 & 2 : Ex-parte.

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 18-11-2021, under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions

¶19

Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.97,24,643,40/- (Rupees Ninety Seven

¶20

¶21

Lakhs Twenty Fore Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Three and Forty Paisa Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing till realization from defendants.

¶22

The Application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed 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.

¶23

Brief facts of the case:

¶24

The Defendant No.1 is the Borrower, and the Defendant No.2 being a Co-Borrower had approached the Applicant Bank for Home Loan to purchase the along with the common rights, amenities and facilities. All the piece and parcel of residential Row house bearing No.15 Constructed in the Schedule A property its known as “COURTYARD” in all measuring 2119.193 square feet of Undivided land area (Common areas) 120.87 square feet of additional garden area and 2291.02 square feet, described as schedule ‘B’ property, and sought for financial assistance.

¶25

The Applicant Bank had initially decided to sanction loan amount of Rs.1,38,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Thirty Eight Lakhs Only) as per the sanction letter dated 18.03.2016. The Applicant Bank after examining the financial status of the of the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had disbursed a sum of Rs.98,39,344/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Forty Four Only) as on 22.03.2016.

¶26

¶27

OA No.837/2022

¶28

The Defendants Nos.1 and 2 had executed Facility Agreement dated 28.03.2016 and other financial documents in favour of the Applicant Bank and agreeing to abide by the terms and conditions. BRL Ventures Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Builder) had entered into an Agreement of sell dated 21.03.2016 with the Defendant No.1 to sell the Schedule Property.

¶29

The Builder had issued a letter dated 23.03.2016 addressed to the Applicant, confirmed for having entered into an Agreement of Sale dated 23.03.2016 with Defendants Nos.1 and 2 to sell the Schedule B Property, and also confirmed that, it has No Objection for the Applicant Bank to provide housing loan to the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 respectively and mortgage the Schedule B property in favour of the Applicant bank. The Builder herein had further undertaken to hand over the Original title deeds duly registered in the name of the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 directly to the Applicant Bank and had undertaken that in case this agreement of sale is terminated by the Defendants for any reasons, whatsoever, the Builder herein shall refund the amount received it from the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in connection with purchase of Schedule Property to the Applicant bank.

¶30

The Applicant Bank had initially decided to sanction loan amount of Rs.1,38,00,000/- ( Rupees One Crore Thirty Eight Lakhs Only) as per sanction letter dated 18.03.2016. the Applicant Bank had vide its disbursal request form had agreed to transfer Rs.95,00,000/- (Ninety Five Lakhs Only) in favour of the M/s. BRL Ventures private Limited vide its bank

¶31

¶32

OA No.837/2022 account No.233805000043 herein maintained with ICIC Bank Ltd and Rs.3,39,344/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and forty Four Only) towards insurance vide ICICI Lombard Ltd. However subsequently the Applicant Bank after examining the financial status of the Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had disbursed a sum of Rs.98,39,344/- (Rupees Ninety Eight Lakhs Thirty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Forty Four only) as on 22.03.2016 the receipt of which had been duly acknowledged by the Defendant Nos.1 and 2.

¶33

The Defendants Nos.1 and 2 were fully aware of rate of interest, tenure of the Loans, equated monthly instalment of the loan along with other details as the same were clearly explained to them based on the same, the loan agreement were executed by the defendants. In terms of the loan agreement, the defendants had agreed to make timely and regular repayment of loan instalments which was the essence of the contract. The Defendants Nos.1 and 2 defaulted in repayments of the loan amount regularly and were very irregular in payments of the EMI. The Applicant Bank had issued Loan Recall Notice dated 27.02.2021 to the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 demanding payment of a sum of Rs.94,92,685/- (Rupees Ninety Four Lakhs Ninety Two Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty Five Only) Despite having received the said notice, the Defendants had not come forward to pay the outstanding due amount. The Defendants subsequently as at 10.06.2021 are due and payable a total sum of Rs.97,24,643.40 (Rupees Ninety Seven Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand Six Hundred and Forty

¶34

¶35

OA No.837/2022

¶36

Three and Forty Paisa Only) which is inclusive of interest under the aforesaid loan account as on 10.06.2021.

¶37

The Last irregular payment dated 05.12.2019. The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after availing loans, failed to repay the loan amount and committed default. However, there was no positive response from the defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendant.

¶38

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants No.1 & 2 by RPAD on 06.03.2023, postal cover was returned with Shara “ Addressee Left ”. Hence, summons through substitute service was taken and the Applicant Bank published the summons to the Defendant in two daily leading newspapers kannada daily Newspaper “Kannada Prabha ’’ and English Daily ‘’The New Indian Express” on 21.05.2023. When OA was taken up on 27.09.2023, even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants, hence, Defendants No.1 & 2 was placed ex-parte on 27.09.2023.

¶39

Heard the submissions of Counsels and perused the records.

¶40

To prove the case, Sri. Premjith.R, Officer, 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 A12. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim

¶41

¶42

OA No.837/2022

¶43

remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶44

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:-

¶45

: O R D E R:

¶46

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶47

(a) The Applicant bank is allowed to recover from defendant jointly or severally to pay a sum of Rs.97,24,643.40 (Rupees Ninety Seven Lakhs Twenty Four Thousand Six Hundred and Forty Three and Forty Paisa Only) as on 10.06.2021 together with future interest at the rate of 24% p.a, from the date of the filing of the OA till the date of realization.

¶48

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned properties in the OA;

¶49

¶50

d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is

¶51

¶52

OA No.837/2022

¶53

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

¶54

(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.

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

[Dictated to the (GS), transcribed by him, corrected and signed by me on this the 19^th day March 2024].

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

OA No.837/2022

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶65

AW-1: Sri.Pramodh Gurumallappa S/o. Sri. Gurumallappa, Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶66

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶67

SL. NO	PARTICULARS	EXHIBITS
1.	Copy of Power of Attorney	A3
2.	Loan application & Sanction Letter dated 18.03.2016	A4 & A5
3.	Facility Agreement dated 28.03.2016	A6
4.	Copy of Agreement to Sell dated 21.03.2016	A7
5.	Copy of the Letter dated 23.03.2016	A8
6.	Copy of the disbursal request Form	A9
7.	Copy of the Loan Recall Notice dated 26.02.2021 issued to Defendants No.1 & 2	A10
8.	Copy of the foreclosure letter dated 10.06.2021 issued to the Defendant Nos.1 & 2 and statement of Accounts	A11 & A12

¶68

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶69

-Nil –

¶70

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶71

-Nil –

¶72

SCHEDULE ‘A’ PROPERTY

¶73

All the piece and parcel of the Immovable property bearing Converted

¶74

Survey No. 163/3 & 162/2 (Converted vide the order bearing No. ALN (EVH)

¶75

¶76

OA No.837/2022

¶77

SR.587/2011-12 dated 18.06.2012 converted vide the order bearing No. ALN EVH SR 5/2012-13 dated 18.06.2012. Both the order passed by deputy commissioner Bengaluru) totally measures about 2 Acres 19 Guntas situated at Varthur village, Varthur Hobli, earlier Bengaluru south Taluk, presently Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru and bounded on the:

¶78

East by : Land in Survey No.162 belongs to V.M. Munithimmayya West by : Road and land in survey No.169 belongs to Munii Shamanna, North by : Land in Survey No.98 belongs to Inamti Land of Shri. Chinnarayaswamy temple, South by : Land in Survey No.163/2 belongs to Gaadi Chinappa.

¶79

SCHEDULE ‘B’ PROPERTY

¶80

All that piece and parcel of residential Row house bearing No.15 constructed in the Schedule ‘A’ property its known as “COURTYARD” in al measuring 2119.193 square feet of Undivided land area (common areas) 120.87 square feet of additional garden area 2291.02 square feet of built up area with all rights appurtenancdes whatsoever hereunder or underneath or above the surface and bounded on the:

¶81

East by : Road, West by : Row House No.16, North : Road, and South by : Row House No.14.

¶82

¶83

OA No.837/2022

¶84

SCHEDULE ‘C’ PROPERTY

¶85

A Three Bedroom Residential Row Houses to be constructed in Ground + First Floor+ Terrace in the Schedule B Property having a built-up area of 2291.02 Square feet (Which is inclusive of common wall between two residential units as may be applicable depending on the type of unit and proportionate share of built-up area of the club house facility.

¶86

Sd/-

¶87

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sri. Ravikiran Rishikesh Kalyanapur

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

Dream Digital Others versus the Varachha Cooperative Bank Limited

Hari So Mahadeo Choure versus Ms Godavari Traders

Ganesh Prasad Jaiswal versus Punjab National Bank

Canara Bank versus M/S Radha Traders

Uco Bank versus Sunil Kumar Anand

Mr Mohinder Kumar versus the Baghat Urban Co. Operative Bank Ltd.