Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Mrs Divya a Raghoji

DRT19 Mar 2024OA/866/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In OA. No.866/2022, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a home loan recovery claim against defaulters. After finding the application compliant with limits and jurisdiction, and noting no response from defendants due to ex-parte service, the court ordered repayment of principal and interest via personal liability or sale of schedule properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.84,57,569.16 with future interest @ 24% p.a. from defendants personally, jointly and severally or by sale of schedule properties.

Icici Bank Limited versus Mrs Divya a Raghoji — 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.866/2022

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

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

¶7

… APPLICANT

¶8

AND:.

¶9

Ms. Divya A Ragholi W/o Aditya Ashok Kumar Raghoji, No.201 Prestige Millinnium Viviani Road, Bangalore-560045, Karnataka.

¶10

Mr. Aditya Ashok Kumar Raghoji,. S/o Mr. Ashok Kumar Raghoji No.201 Prestige Millinnium Viviani Road, Bangalore-560045, Karnataka.

¶11

...DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶13

Applicant : Sri. Anvaya Law Defendant Nos.1 & 2 : Exparte.

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 18.11.2021 under section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.84,57,569.16 (Rupees eighty four lakh fifty seven thousand five hundred and sixty nine and Paise sixteen

¶16

¶17

OA. No. 866/2022

¶18

only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶19

The application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 Recovery of the Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶20

Brief facts of the case:

¶21

It is the case of the applicant bank where in the Defendants No. 1 is

¶22

the Borrower, and the Defendant No. 2 being a Co-Borrower. The Defendants had approached the applicant bank seeking for Home Loan of Rs.87,00,000/-(Rupees eighty seven lakh Only) an loan application dated 21.10.2016 for the purpose of purchase of Residential Flat. After considering the proposal of the Defendants applicant bank sanctioned the for Home Loan of Rs.87,00,000/-(Rupees eighty seven lakh Only) vide Sanction Letter dated 17.12.2016. Subsequently, the Applicant Bank after examining the financial status of the Defendant Nos.1 & 2 had disbursed a sum of Rs.87,00,000/-(Rupees eighty seven lakh Only) as on 24.11.2016.

¶23

And the Applicant Bankits disbursal request form had agreed to transfer Rs.90,00,000/- (Rupees ninety lakh only) in favour of the builder vide his bank account No.9132020027015833 herein maintained with Axis bank and Rs.3,00,0008/- (Rupees three lakh only) towards insurance vide ICICI Lombard Ltd.

¶24

¶25

OA. No. 866/2022

¶26

The defendants executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loans, interest, cost and charges, and Defendant No.1 & 2 executed Facility Agreement dated 27.10.2016 and Absolute Sale Deed dated 23.12.2016 and NOC Letter dated 02.12.2016 in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶27

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after availing the said facilities, failed to repay the loan amount and committed default. The Applicant bank issue a Recall Notice dated 15.12.2017 calling upon the defendants to repay the entire outstanding loan amount.in respect of both loans. However, there was no positive response from the Defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the Defendants.

¶28

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendant No.1

¶29

& 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due the same is duly returned unserved with postal shara “No such person” Hence, summons through substitute service was taken and the Applicant Bank published on 23.05.2023 in two daily leading newspapers, “The New Indian Express” in English Newspaper and “Kannada Prabha” in Kannada Newspaper. When OA was taken up on 11.09.2023 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the Defendants; hence, Defendant Nos.1 & 2 was placed exparte on 11.09.2023.

¶30

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶31

¶32

OA. No. 866/2022

¶33

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sri. Pramodh G S/o

¶34

Gurumallappa Manager, has filed Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, the list of Document came to be marked as Ex.A2 and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A12. As the Defendant remained ex-parte, the OA

¶35

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

¶36

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the 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:

¶37

: O R D E R:

¶38

9. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶39

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendants Nos.1 & 2

¶40

personally, jointly and severally to pay an amount Rs.84,57,569.16 (Rupees eighty four lakh fifty seven thousand five hundred and sixty nine and Paise sixteen only) as on 10.06.2021 together with future interest @

¶41

24% p.a. from the date of OA application and till the date of realization.

¶42

¶43

OA. No. 866/2022

¶44

(b) In the event of failure of the Defendants to pay the aforesaid amount,

¶45

the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned property in the OA;

¶46

¶47

(d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movable and immovable) respectively to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶48

(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 defendant 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 the respective defendants to the applicant bank.

¶49

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the

¶50

date of this final order.

¶51

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery

¶52

Officer in terms of the final order.

¶53

¶54

OA. No. 866/2022

¶55

(h) Interim Application pending if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶56

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

¶57

[Dictated to the (CS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on this the 19^th Day of March 2024].

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

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

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Applicant Evidence
A2	List of Documents.
A3	Copy of Power of Attorney
A4 & A5	Loan Application & Sanction Letter dated 17.12.2016
A6	Facility Agreement dated 27.10.2016
A7	Copy of Sale deed dated 23.12.2016
A8	Copy of Letter dated 02.12.2016
A9	Copy of Disbursal request Form
A10	Copy of the Loan Recall Notice dated 15.12.2017 issued to Defendant Nos.1 & 2
A11 & A12	Copy of the foreclosure letter dated 10.06.2021 issued to the Defendant Nos.1 & 2 and statement of Accounts.
Witness	Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶65

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶66

SCHEDULE A PROPERTY

¶67

All that piece and parcel of Converted Sy.No.239/3, measuring 0-03 (three) guntas, converted Sy.No.243/1, measuring 0.25.08 (twenty five

¶68

¶69

OA. No. 866/2022

¶70

and half) guntas, converted Sy.No.243/1, measuring 0-11 (eleven) guntas, converted Sy.No.243/1 measuring 0-11 (eleven) guntas, converted Sy.No.243/1, measuring 0.20.08 (twntly and half) guntas, converted Sy.No.239/2, measuring 2249 sq.ft. and converted Old Sy.No.240, Newe Sy.No. 240/2, measuring 1850 sq.ft. totally measuring 1 acre 23.98 guntas or 69639 sq.ft. having amalgamate BBMP Katha No.749-743/142/1, situated at Gunjur village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, Bangalore and presently falls in the limits of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Bangalore and bounded by:

¶71

East by: Land bearing Sy.No.243/1 and land belongs to Thippasandra Rama Reddy

¶72

West by: Varthur Main Road

¶73

North by: Land bearing Sy.Nos. 238 and 239 and South by: Land bearing Sy.No.243/1 of Hosamane Abbaish and Sy.No.240/2 of Smt. Jyothi and Sy.No.239/9 of Smt. Lakshmi.

¶74

SCHEDULE B PROPERTY

¶75

A Proportionate 460 sq.ft. of undivided share, right title and interest in the Composite Schedule A Property.

¶76

SCHEDULE C PROPERTY

¶77

A Three bedrooms Apartment bearing No. Flat No.1-G in 1st floor in Block B of the building known as VAHE IMPERIAL GARDENS constructed in Composite Schedule A Property having a super built up area of 1395 sq.ft. with Vitrified Tiles flooring and one covered Car parking space in the Lower Basement.

¶78

Sd/-

¶79

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶80

DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶81

¶82

OA. No. 866/2022

Icici Bank Limited v. Mrs Divya a Raghoji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Mrs Divya a Raghoji

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.