Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Ram Rattan

DRT13 Aug 2025OA/208/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed ICICI Bank Limited's application for recovery of Rs.22,63,753/- with interest from two defendants who failed to repay a term loan and related ECLGS facility. The Tribunal issued a recovery certificate and directed the sale of the hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Recovery order allowing recovery of Rs.22,63,753/- with interest, issuing recovery certificate, and directing sale of hypothecated vehicle.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 208/2022 Date of Institution: 21.01.2022 Date of Decision: 13.08.2025

¶4

ICICI Bank Limited having its branches all over India and a branch at 1^st Floor, Near N.K. Sharma Office, Chandigarh Ambala National Highway, Zirakpur, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Ram Rattan s/o Sh. Ram Saran, r/o Siharri Mushlmana (769), District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

¶8

Ram Dayal s/o Sh. Bala Ram, r/o Boharon (871), Kaba Kalan, Tehsil & District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Manav Singal proxy counsel for Sh. DK Singhal, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 01.03.2023 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of Rs.22,63,753/- with interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 21.01.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

ICICI Bank Limited has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.22,63,753/- with interest against Sh. Ram Rattan and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 27.09.2019, it had granted a Term Loan of Rs.16,99,795/- to defendant No.1 for Vehicle purpose. To secure the loan, Defendant had hypothecated vehicle (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). Defendant No.2 stood as guarantor. The loan was chargeable to interest @12% per annum with monthly rests. During the COVID period, as per the guidelines of Government of India, on 13.07.2020, upon the request of defendant Nos. 1 and 2, the applicant bank granted ECLGS

¶17

¶18

facility of Rs.3.20 Lacs. The loan was chargeable to interest @9.25% per annum with monthly rests. On 06.09.2021, a sum of Rs.22,63,753/- was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 28.03.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 01.03.2023, they were proceeded ex parte . 4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Mr. Mohd. Vajid, Authorized Officer along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-11. 5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan under various schemes and on 06.09.2021, a sum of Rs.22,63,753/- was due. 6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of Rs.22,63,753/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Sixty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Three Only) with interest @12% per annum with monthly rests from 21.01.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated vehicle fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶20

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. 8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly. 9. Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 23.09.2025, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the hypothecated vehicle as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act .

¶21

¶22

A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 13.08.2025 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Icici Bank Limited v. Ram Rattan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Ram Rattan

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

Shanis.P.P versus Bank of India

Central Bank of India versus Smt.Laxmi Devi

Bank of India versus M/S Shanti Industries

Punjab National Bank versus M/s Piyush Enterprises

Union Bank of India versus Ms Tirtha Tea Traders and Ors.

Punjab National Bank versus Baljinder Singh