Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Aps International and Others

DRT22 Oct 2025OA/32/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's original application for recovery of a term loan granted for a commercial vehicle. The court found no dispute in evidence and ex-parte proceeded against defendants. It directed payment of principal plus reduced uniform interest at 8% p.a. and issued a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs.33,93,930.80 p with 8% per annum simple interest; issued Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Aps International and Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.32/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BYMRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.12.2024

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 22.10.2025

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd. a Body Corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having its Registered Office at ICICI Bank Tower, 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 SCO 132-133-134, Sector 9 C, Chandigarh-160017 through its Authorized Signatory, Mohd Vajid.

¶7

……..Applicant Versus

¶8

M/s APS International, through its Proprietor Sh. Anterpreet Singh, Shop No. 74, Bansal Complex, Indl. Area-B, Ludhiana, Punjab, Pin-141003

¶9

Sh. Anterpreet Singh s/o Sh. Paramvir Singh r/o House No. 337, Near Police Station, Phase 1 Urban Estate Dugri, Ludhiana, Ludhiana, Punjab, Pin-141002

¶10

Smt. Jaspreet Kaur w/o Sh. Anterpreet Singh r/o House No. 337, Near Police Station, Phase 1 Urban Estate Dugri, Ludhiana, Punjab, Pin-141002.

¶11

Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Himendra Pal Singh, Advocate for the applicant

¶14

(through VC)

¶15

Defendants are ex-parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

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.33,93,930.80p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Ninety Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty & Paise

¶18

2 OA/32/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS MESSERS APS INTERNATIONAL AND OTHERS

¶19

Eighty Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Mohd. Vajid , Authorized Representative o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 18.09.2019, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for grant of Term Loan of Rs.30.40 Lacs for purchase of commercial vehicle vide Preliminary Credit facility application form and credit facility application form dated 05.04.2023, which are Annexures A3 and A4 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.30.40 Lacs for purchase of commercial vehicle and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no. 1 through its proprietor had hypothecated its moveable assets i.e. Commercial Vehicle namely TATA LPT 2818 BSVI, bearing registration No. PB10JB8142, Chassis No. MAT794003PAB03197, Engine No.32B95410556 vide deed of hypothecation dated 05.04.2023, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Form of particulars of vehicle, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. Documents executed: - GST Registration certificated dated 23.09.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 05.04.2023, which is Annexure A6 to this OA; Loan recall Notice dated 16.10.2024, which is Annexure A8 to this OA; Statement of Account, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶22

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.33,93,930.80p, 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.

¶23

3 OA/32/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS MESSERS APS INTERNATIONAL AND OTHERS

¶24

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 14.10.2025. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Mohd. Vajid, Authorized Signator y, ICICI BANK LIMITED, h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel through video conferencing 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 A9 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.33,93,930.80p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Ninety Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty & Paise Eighty 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.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24.00% p.a. with monthly rests from 15.10.2025 till the realization. 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/hypothecated assets, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this

¶26

4 OA/32/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS MESSERS APS INTERNATIONAL AND OTHERS

¶27

Tribunal deems it 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.

¶28

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.33,93,930.80p (Rupees Thirty Three Lacs Ninety Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty & Paise Eighty 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 vehicles 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.

¶29

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 01.11.2025. 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.

¶30

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal . Dated: 22.10.2025

¶31

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

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Aps International and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Aps International 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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Randhir Singh

Indian Bank versus Sh. Sukhwinder Singh

Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjit Singh and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Baljinder Singh and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Chanan Singh and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Prem Singh and Another