Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Shankar

DRT8 Aug 2025OA/1608/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an ex-parte application by ICICI Bank Ltd. for recovery of dues from three borrowers who defaulted on a KCC loan. The tribunal reduced the claim amount and fixed future interest at a lower rate, directing sale of mortgaged agricultural land for recovery.

What did the court decide?

Defendants to pay Rs.20,79,590 plus future interest @9% p.a.; mortgaged agricultural properties to be made chargeable for repayment; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Shankar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

Presented on: 26.10.2021 Registered on: 27.12.2023 Decided on: 08.08.2025 Duration: Y M D 03 09 12

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT PUNE (Before Shri Dilip G. Murumkar, Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.1608/2023.

¶3

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

¶4

Registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered at ICICI Bank Ltd, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara 390 007 & having its Branch Office at House No.1682, Kargani, Atpadi-Sangli Road, Taluka Atpadi, District Sangli-415 306.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. Mr. Shankar Shivaji Patil

¶8

Age: 42 years, Occ.- Agri. & Business,

¶9

2. Mr. Shivaji Nana Patil

¶10

Age: 67 years, Occ.- Agri. & Business,

¶11

3. Sou. Nanda Shankar Patil

¶12

Age: 44 years, Occ.- Agri. & Business, All R/at and Post –Mahud Budruk, Sangole Road, Kadam Wasti, Taluka-Sangole, District – Solapur-413 306.

¶13

… Defendants

¶14

APPEARANCES

¶15

For the Applicant Mr. V. V. Chandavale - Advocate For the Defendants Ex parte. TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT –Rs.20,89,589.56Ps.

Page 1 of 6

(OA No.1608/2023)

[ANIL]

JUDGMENT (Delivered on 8^th August, 2025)

¶20

The Applicant Bank has filed present application for recovery of sum of Rs.20,89,589.56Ps with future interest @11.50% p.a. with monthly rests towards KCC Loan Account No. KCC/269944896/ 637451000164, from 30.04.2021 till payment or realization of entire debts, from the defendants.

¶21

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶22

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 approached to the Applicant Bank on 10.09.2015 for availing KCC Loan Facility and the applicant bank considered the request of the defendants and sanctioned Rs.15 Lakhs, on certain terms and conditions.

¶23

In order to secure the said KCC Loan facility, the defendants have executed necessary loan transaction and security documents, in favour of the Applicant Bank, as set out in Para No.5.11 of the Original Application.

¶24

Further, the defendants have also executed Hypothecation Deed dated 28.09.2015 to secure KCC loan of Rs.15 lakhs and thereby hypothecated Crop standing or stocked, Cattles, Machinery and Equipment, Receivables, Book-debt, etc., in favour of the Applicant Bank, as set out in Para No.5.11(b) of the Original Application.

(OA No.1608/2023)

Page 2 of 6

[ANIL]

Further, the defendants have executed Registered Mortgage Deed on 29.09.2015 at Sr.No.4816/2015 in the Office of Sub Registrar Sangole, in respect of all those piece and parcel of agricultural lands Gat No.1619 admeasuring area 00H 81R out of 09H 01R; Gat No1610/4 admeasuring 03H 80R; Gat No.1883 admeasuring 01H 07.50R out of 02H 32R; Gat No.1876 admeasuring 01H 74R out of 03H 47R, thus total agricultural lands admeasuring 07 Hectare, 42.50 Are owned by Defendant Nos.1, at village Mahud Budruk, Taluka Sangole, District Solapur, more particularly mentioned in Para No.5.11(e) in the Original Application.

¶29

It is contended that the defendants have not adhered to the terms and conditions of the said loan agreement executed by them and neglected to pay the outstanding amount to the applicant bank in spite of repeated requests and demands. As the defendants committed default in repayment of loan, the loan account of the defendants has been classified as NPA on 03.05.2018, as per the directives and guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, the Applicant Bank issued Legal Notice dated 19.07.2021 to the defendants to repay the entire amount outstanding under the said Term Loan facility. However, the defendants failed to comply with the requisitions contained in the legal notice and failed to repay the amount outstanding and also failed to regularize the said Loan Account.

¶30

Hence, this application is filed.

(OA No.1608/2023)

Page 3 of 6

[ANIL]

Defendants failed to appear despite service of summons. Hence, the application proceeded ex-parte against them vide Order dated 02.04.2025 passed below the Application (Exhibit-01).

¶35

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence (Exh.-6) of Mr. Utkarsh Uma Shankar Tiwari, Debt Manager & Authorized Officer, which supports the case of the applicant elucidated in the application.

¶36

The Applicant Bank has produced in evidence the original loan documents at Annexures-AW-1-1 to AW-22, which corroborate the case of the Applicant Bank.

¶37

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Bank.

¶38

Since the defendants failed to appear and contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Applicant Bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank is entitled for reliefs as claimed.

¶39

The Applicant Bank has claimed expenses towards costs of typing, notice, Xerox etc. of Rs.10,000/- and the same are required to be deducted from the total claim amount. Therefore, the total claim amount of Rs.20,89,589.56 is reduced to Rs.20,79,590/- .

¶40

10 The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest at the rate of 11.50% p.a. for the said KCC Loan Facility, but, considering the facts of the

(OA No.1608/2023)

Page 4 of 6

[ANIL]

present case, I am of the opinion that if future interest is granted @9% p.a. (simple) for the said loan facility, it would be just and reasonable.

¶45

11 Hence, I pass the following order: -

¶46

ORDER

¶47

(A) Original Application No.1608/2023 is allowed with costs.

¶48

(B) Defendant Nos.1 to 3 either jointly or severally shall pay to the Applicant Bank an amount of Rs.20,79,590/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Five Hundred Ninety only) towards KCC Loan Account No. KCC/269944896/637451000164 with future interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e.26.10.2021 till payment/realization of the amount mentioned in this operative order.

¶49

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by mortgaging the immovable properties i.e. all those piece and parcel of agricultural lands Gat No.1619 admeasuring area 00H 81R out of 09H 01R; Gat No1610/4 admeasuring 03H 80R; Gat No.1883 admeasuring 01H 07.50 R out of 02H 32R; Gat No.1876 admeasuring 01H 74R out of 03H 47R, thus total agricultural lands admeasuring 07 Hectare, 42.50 Are owned by Defendant Nos.1, at village Mahud Budruk, Taluka Sangole, District Solapur, more particularly mentioned in Schedule of Secured Mortgaged Properties in the Original Application.

(OA No.1608/2023)

Page 5 of 6

[ANIL]

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the above mentioned mortgaged immovable properties to recover its dues.

¶54

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate. (F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the Applicant Bank and the Defendants.

¶55

Place: Pune Date: 08.08.2025

¶56

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune.

¶57

(OA No.1608/2023)

¶58

Page 6 of 6

¶59

[ANIL]

Icici Bank Limited v. Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Shankar

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

Idbi Bank versus Rajaram Murari Kattikar

Federal Bank versus Tukaram Rupnoor

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Sai Sales Corporation Prop Mrs. Santosh Vijay Jalan

State Bank of India versus Mr. Sandip Ghorpade

State Bank of India versus Surajya Polymers Private Limited

State Bank of India versus Ashwini Suhas Admane Prop Sahas Enterprises