Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Amrjit Kaur and Others

DRT16 Jan 2025OA/1986/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-III Chandigarh allowed the Original Application filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of Rs. 20,40,545.20p from defendants. The court adjusted interest rates to 8% p.a. and ordered recovery from hypothecated properties under SARFAESI provisions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to recover Rs.20,40,545.20p with 8% p.a. interest from hypothecated properties or personal assets. Issued Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Amrjit Kaur and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1986/2022

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 29.08.2022

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 16.01.2025

¶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-390007, and its corporate office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051, and having branches all over India and one of its branch offices situated at 1^st Floor, Near N.K. Sharma, Office Chandigarh Ambala Highway Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar Mohali Punjab through its authorized Signatory Sh.Mohd

¶7

Vajid . ……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Smt. Amarjit kaur W/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o House no.764, Street No.4, Dasmesh Nagar, Ward No.45, Near Campa Cola Chowk, Ludhiana, Punjab-141003.

¶10

Sh. Tarvinder Singh S/o Sh. Nirmal Singh, R/o House no.764, Street No.4, Dasmesh Nagar, Ward No.45, Near Campa Cola Chowk, Ludhiana, Punjab-141003.

¶11

M/s Rattan Machine Tools, 765, Street No.4, Gill Road, Ludhiana, Punjab-141003, through its proprietor.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Kamal Dev Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for Applicant Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.20,40,545.20p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty Thousand Five Hundred Forty Five & Twenty Paise only). The Original Application has been filed

¶17

¶18

through Mohd. Vajid authorized signatory of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Copy of General Power of Attorney dated18.09.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA. 2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of Car Loan of Rs.38.00 Lacs & further for Term Loan under Emergency Credit Line Guaranteed Scheme of Rs.4.90 Lacs vide Loan applications dated 26.10.2017 & 18.08.2020, which are Annexures A2 & A6 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned Car Loan of Rs.38.00 Lacs & further sanctioned Term Loan under Emergency Credit Line Guaranteed Scheme of Rs.4.90 Lacs vide Sanction Letters dated 26.10.2017 & 18.08.2020, which are Annexures A3 & A7 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant had hypothecated vehicles i.e. Sedan bearing Engine No.65192432539134 and Chassis No.WDD2120036L049992 & Registration No.PB10FH2419 vide FOP (form of particulars), which is Annexure A5 to this OA.

¶20

Documents executed:- Deed of hypothecation dated 26.102.2017, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 17.04.2021 & 04.12.2021, which is Annexure A8 to this OA and Statement of accounts along with Banker’s Book evidence dated 21.04.2022, which are Annexures A9 & A10 to this OA.

¶21

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in both the loan accounts there was a debit of Rs.20,40,545.20p, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notices but they did not repay the outstanding amount, therefore, the applicant bank requested to accept the application and to issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶22

The defendants were served notices to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded 18.06.2024.

¶23

In support of the OA, affidavit of Mohd. Vajid authorized signatory, ICICI Bank Ltd., has been filed.

¶24

¶25

Heard arguments and perused record.

¶26

It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant bank had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A10 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant bank for availing of the loan facilities which were 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, accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.20,40,545.20p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty Thousand Five Hundred Forty Five & Twenty 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 accounts. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @13.26%p.a. in two loans facility and interest @9.25% p.a.in ECLGS with monthly rests from 22.04.2022 till the realization.

¶27

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 defendant, 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 just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.20,40,545.20p (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty Thousand Five Hundred Forty Five & Twenty Paise only) jointly and severally, with costs, current

¶28

¶29

and future simple interest @8.00%p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of OA till the date of realization of the amount. Accordingly, the applicant bank 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 bank 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. 12. Any other application pending stands disposed of. 13. Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly. 14. Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.02.2025. 15. 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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 16.01.2025.

¶30

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Amrjit Kaur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Amrjit Kaur 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

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus Dalbir Singh and Others

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Vp Associates and Others

Bank of India versus Tajinder Pal Singh and others

Union Bank of India versus Messrs Radhe Krishna Enterprises and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Amarjeet Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Harjit Singh and Others