Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Bansiwala Roadlines

DRT23 Dec 2024TA/2504/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for recovery of dues of Rs.1.53 crore from defaulting borrowers. The court, noting an ex-parte sale of hypothecated vehicles, ordered payment of the outstanding sum along with future interest, directing recovery from the sale proceeds or the respondents' properties if needed.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to pay Rs.1,53,75,913.25 along with future interest of 9.13% p.a. to the applicant bank within 30 days.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Bansiwala Roadlines — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

T.A No.2504 OF 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No.2504 of 2022

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd.

¶6

E Block, Videocon Tower Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-110055 Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Bansiwala Roadlines (Borrower)

¶9

Through its partners At: Khaira No.Opp 18, Corporate Main Khaira Road Bank Delhi-10043

¶10

Sh.Raj Singh s/o Sh.Pratap Singh Co-borrower & Partner R/o Daulatabad (53), Gurgaon, Haryana-122006

¶11

Sh.Kaptan Singh sio Sh.Deputy Lal Co-borrower & Partner R/o Khasra No.18, Village Khaira Najafgarh, Delhi-110043

¶12

Sh.Suresh Kumar s/o Sh.Rishal Singh Partner R/o 37, Lagarpur, Jhajhar Haryana-124105

¶13

Nargesh Kumar s/o Sh.Suraj Singh Partner R/o H.No.195A, Gali No.2 East Krishna Vihar, Najafgarh Delhi-110043 Defendants

¶14

Present: Sh. Rakesh Singh, counsel for the applicant bank

¶15

Date of Institution: 28.06.2019

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 23.12.2024

¶17

T.A No.2504 OF 2022

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 28.06.2019 filed before DRT III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Arun Chaudhary, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 read with Rule 8 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Rules 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,53,75,913.25 (Rupees One Crore Fifty Three Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred Thirteen and paisa Twenty Five only) as on 19.03.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.13% per annum from the date of filing of this O.A. till its realization and costs.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.2 to 5 as partners/guarantors of defendant no.1 vide their loan application dated 30.12.2017, the applicant bank sanctioned five Commercial loans (Chasis & Bodies) facilities of Rs.126.40 lacs and Rs.30.31 lacs on 30.12.2017 and disbursed an amount of Rs.125.00 lacs to M/s lndraprastha Automobiles Pvt.Ltd. and Rs.29,90,549/- to defendant no.1 as per request on 14.02.2018 after deducting disbursement charges as per following details:

¶21

SN	Loan Amt	Commercial Vehicle	%ROI	Tenure	EMI	Disb.date
1	2528000	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	64652	14.02.2018
2	606210	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	15503	14.02.2018
3	2528000	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	64652	14.02.2018
4	606210	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	15503	14.02.2018
5	606210	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	15503	14.02.2018
6	606210	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	15503	14.02.2018
7	606210	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	15503	14.02.2018
8	2528000	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	64652	14.02.2018
9	2528000	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	64652	14.02.2018
10	2528000	Mahindra Blazo 49	9.13	47	64652	14.02.2018

¶22

The defendants agreed to pay penal interest @24% per annum in case of default in payment of installments and applicant bank

¶23

T.A No.2504 OF 2022

¶24

would be entitled to take possession of the commercial vehicles in the event of default.

¶25

That in order to avail the said loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan application dated 30.12.2017 and executed Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation and Irrevocable Power of Attorney with the applicant bank on 30.12.2017.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant no.1 hypothecated the commercial vehicles (C;lasis & Body) having Registration Nos. RJ-52GA-4260, RJ-52GA-4261, RJ-52GA4262, RJ-52GA-4263, RJ-52GA-4264 purchased from loan in favour of the applicant bank.

¶27

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions and despite of several requests and reminders, the defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank issued the recall notice dated 14.02.2019 calling upon the defendants to pay the entire outstanding dues to the applicant bank but the defendants did not clear the dues of the applicant bank and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶28

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 24.05.2022, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared

¶29

Sc(--

¶30

T.A No.2504 OF 2022

¶31

before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by .he defendants.

¶32

The applicant bank filed M.A.No.374/2023 before DRAT, Delhi which directed this tribunal to dispose the I.A.No.2536/2019 as per law and this tribunal on 01.09.2023 has given permission to auction to auction the hypothecated vehicle in possession. The applicant bank submitted on 27.11.2024 that the hypothecated vehicles have been sold and Rs.15.00 lacs have been recovered.

¶33

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Arun Chaudhary, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex-AW1/A, Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan Ex-AW1/B, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation Ex.AW1/C, Irrevocable Power of Attorney Ex-AW1/D, Recall Notice Ex.AW1/E, Receipts Ex.AW1/F, Statement of Account Ex.AW1/G.

¶34

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶35

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶36

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶37

T.A No.2504 OF 2022

¶38

ORDER

¶39

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.1,53,75,913.25 (Rupees One Crore Fifty Three Lacs Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred Thirteen and paisa Twenty Five only) together with future interest @9.13% per annum from the date, of filing of this O.A. till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of following hypothecated Vehicles

¶40

SN	Commercial Vehicle	REGN. No.
1	Mahindra Blazo-49	RJ-52GA-4260
2	Mahindra Blazo-49	RJ-52GA-4261
3	Mahindra Blazo-49	RJ-52GA-4262
4	Mahindra Blazo-49	RJ-52GA-4263
5	Mahindra Blazo-49	RJ-52GA-4264

¶41

In case of default, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶42

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery T. ibunal-I, Delhi.

¶43

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 21.02.2025.

¶44

(IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶45

$d -

¶46

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶47

(Pronounced in open court) Dated: 23.12.2024

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Bansiwala Roadlines

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Bansiwala Roadlines

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

Union Bank of India (E-Andhra Bank) versus Sh. Pracheer Bhardwaj

Axis Bank versus Sh. Kapil Gupta

Canara Bank versus Smt.Sidamma

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Shri Giriraj Traders

State Bank of India (E-State Bank of Hydrabad) versus M/S Aakriti Fashion

State Bank of India (e-State Bank of Patiala) versus Smt. Alka Jain