Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Others

DRT31 Oct 2025OA/1027/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's case for recovery of Rs.36,66,456.69 against respondent borrowers and guarantor on unopposed evidence, directing issue of a Recovery Certificate and allowing uniform simple interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate to be issued; Defendants liable to pay Rs.36,66,456.69 with interest at 8% p.a.; liability to attach/sell assets if unpaid.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1027/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 19.07.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 31.10.2025

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd., a Body Corporate incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulations Act 1949 and having its registered office at ICICI Bank Towers, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390007, and having branches allover India and one of its branch offices situated at ICICI Bank Ltd., Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab through its authorized signatory Sh. Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Sukhwinder Singh S/o Sh. Amar Singh, R/o Village Chandu

¶10

Majra, Rajpura, Patiala, Punjab-140401.

¶11

Sh. Manpreet Singh S/o Sh. Sukhwinder Singh, R/o Village

¶12

Chandu Majra, Rajpura, Patiala, Punjab-140401.

¶13

Sh. Avtar Singh S/o Sh. Resham Singh, R/o Village Jansui,

¶14

Rajpura, Patiala, Punjab.

¶15

………. Defendants

¶16

Advocates:

¶17

Argued by Sh. Gurnam Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for Applicant

¶18

Defendants already ex parte

¶19

FINAL ORDER

¶20

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.36,66,456.69p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Sixty Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Six & Sixty Nine Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory of the applicant, who is

¶21

¶22

OA NO. 1027/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS SH. SUKHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶23

competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 08.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶24

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 had approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 30.00 Lacs vide Loan Application dated 05.03.2021, which is Annexure A2 to this OA. Defendant no. 3 stood as guarantor.

¶25

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs. 30.00 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 25.03.2021, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions duly accepted by the defendants.

¶26

Defendant Nos. 1& 2 had mortgaged their immovable properties i.e. Land measuring 24 Bighas detailed as under: -

¶27

(a) Land Measuring 13Bigha-10Biswa situated at Village Chandu Majra, Hadbast No. 21, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab.

¶28

(b) Land Measuring 10Bigha-10Biswa situated at Village Basantpura, Hadbast No. 22, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab. vide Declaration U/s 4(1) dated 17.05.2021, along with letter to SubRegistrar for creation of charge, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶29

Documents executed : -Hypothecation deed dated 20.04.2021, which

¶30

is Annexure A4 to this OA; Deed of guarantee dated 30.04.2021, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Loan recall notice dated 18.08.2023 along with dispatched proof, which is Annexure A7 to this OA and Statement of Account along with Banker’s Book Evidence, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶31

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.36,66,456.69p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

¶33

OA NO. 1027/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS SH. SUKHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶34

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte on 23.09.2025.

¶35

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory, ICICI Bank Ltd., h as been filed.

¶36

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶37

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to them and for that they had executed all the relevant documents in favour of the bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.36,66,456.69p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Sixty Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Six & Sixty Nine Paise Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶38

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @10.85% p.a. along with half yearly rests from 01.05.2025 till the realization.

¶39

The Tribunal is of the considered opinion that sometimes in appropriate cases the prerogative of mercy is the brightest jewel in the crown of the Judge. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case including nature of the mortgaged property, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this Tribunal deems it

¶40

¶41

OA NO. 1027/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS SH. SUKHWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

¶42

just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly.

¶43

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.36,66,456.69p (Rupees Thirty Six Lacs Sixty Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Six & Sixty Nine Paise Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in the loan account from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant shall be entitled to recover aforesaid amount from the sale of hypothecated/mortgaged properties of the defendants in execution proceedings if not sold earlier under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If the dues of the applicant still remain unsatisfied, it shall be entitled to recover the same by attachment and sale of personal assets of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶44

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶45

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶46

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 11.11.2025.

¶47

Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant and be sent to defendants through registered/speed post and this order be also uploaded on the official website of this Tribunal and record be consigned.

¶48

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶49

Dated: 31.10.2025

¶50

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶51

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Sukhwinder Singh and Others

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

Capital Small Finance Bank Limited versus Sh. Baljeet Singh and Others

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Late Sh. Harbhajan Singh through His Legal Heir

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Gulab singh

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Rinku Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Waho Waho Enterprises and Others

Central Bank of India versus M/S Deepika Enterprises and Others