Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Messrs Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. and Another

DRT18 Oct 2025OA/355/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-III, Chandigarh allowed an ex-parte original application filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. against defendants for recovery of dues under Section 19 RDB Act, 1993. The court adjusted the interest rate to 8% p.a. and authorized recovery from hypothecated vehicles or personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.3,89,17,358.90p with costs and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. until realization; authorization for sale of hypothecated vehicles or attachment of personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Messrs Jai Mata Durga Transport Co… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.355/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 20.03.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 18.10.2025

¶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, Sh. Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/S Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. through its Proprietor Sh. Ramesh Kumar Thakur, Opposite Ambuja Cement Factory Gate, PO Ghanauli, District Rupnagar, Punjab-140113.

¶10

Sh. Ramesh Kumar Thakur S/o Sh. Sh. Dhani Ram Thakur R/o House No. 5724-B, Sector 38 West, Chandigarh (U.T) Pun 160036

¶11

………. Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Himendra Pal Singh, Advocate for the applicant (through VC)

¶14

Defendants are ex-parte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

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.3,89,17,358.90p (Rupees Three Crore Eighty Nine Lacs Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Eight and Ninety Paise Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory o f the applicant,

¶17

¶18

OA NO.355/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO. AND ANOTHER

¶19

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

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 had approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.2,27,50,000.00 for purchase of Five Commercial Vehicles i.e. Mahindra and Mahindra Blazo 55 TR BS6 36 CL CB Commercial Vehicles and for their bodies, vide Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form and Credit Facility Application Form dated 29.03.2022, which are Annexure A4 and A5 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.1,96,88,000.00 for purchase of Four Commercial Vehicles i.e. TATA SIGNA 3525.TK 8X4 Commercial Vehicles, vide Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form dated 27.03.2023 and Credit Facility Application Form dated 03.04.2023, which are Annexure A13 and A14 to this OA. Thereafter, the defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 again approached the applicant for the grant of Term Loan of Rs.1,44,90,000.00 for purchase of Two Commercial Vehicles i.e. Ashok Leyland Tipper UG3525/52 T TIP Commercial Vehicles, vide Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form dated 24.04.2023 and Credit Facility Application Form dated 24.04.2023, which are Annexure A21 and A22 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the Term Loan of Rs.2,27,50,000.00 for purchase of Five Mahindra and Mahindra Commercial Vehicles and for their bodies. Thereafter, another Term Loan Rs.1,96,88,000.00 for purchase of Four TATA Signa Commercial Vehicles and Term Loan of Rs.1,44,90,000.00 for purchase of Three Ashok Leyland Tipper Commercial Vehicles and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶22

The defendant no. 1 through its proprietor defendant no. 2 hypothecated Twelve commercial vehicles detailed as under: -

¶23

¶24

OA NO.355/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO. AND ANOTHER

¶25

(i) Five Mahindra and Mahindra Blazo 55 TR BS6 36 CL CB vehicles vide deed of hypothecation dated 29.03.2022, which is Annexure A6 to this OA. Details of vehicles are as under: -

¶26

(a) Bearing Registration no. PB65BC1145, Engine No. PANZC11176, Chasis No. MA1UAARXFN6C77066. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A8 to this OA. (b) Bearing Registration no. PB65BC2945, Engine No. PANZC11177, Chasis No. MA1UAARXFN6C77067. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A9 to this OA. (c) Bearing Registration no. PB65BC1245, Engine No. PANZB11017, Chasis No. MA1UAARXFN6C77068. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A10 to this OA. (d) Bearing Registration no. PB65BC1545, Engine No. PANZB11015, Chasis No. MA1UAARXFN6C77069. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A11 to this OA. (e) Bearing Registration no. PB65BB9545, Engine No. PANZC11175, Chasis No. MA1UAARXFN6C77070. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A12 to this OA. (ii) Four TATA SIGNA 3525.TK 8X4 EBSVI, HD23BX Commercial Vehicles, vide deed of hypothecation dated 03.04.2023, which is Annexure A15 to this OA. Details of vehicles are as under: - (a) Bearing Registration no. HR58C5645, Engine No. B6.7B6A250D06232B64269738, Chasis No. MAT777012P3B04709. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A17 to this OA. (b) Bearing Registration no. HR58C9845, Engine No. B6.7B6A250D06232B64272380, Chasis No. MAT777012P3B05840. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A18 to this OA. (c) Bearing Registration no. HR58C9545, Engine No. B6.7B6A250D06232B64272271, Chasis No.

¶27

¶28

OA NO.355/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO. AND ANOTHER

¶29

MAT777012P3B05782. Form of Particulars of vehicle is

¶30

Exhibit A19 to this OA. (d) Bearing Registration no. HR58C8445, Engine No. B6.7B6A250D06232C64275469, Chasis No. MAT777012P3C07052. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A20 to this OA.

¶31

(iii) Three Ashok Leyland Tipper UG3525/52 T TIP Commercial Vehicles, vide deed of hypothecation dated 24.04.2023, which is Annexure A23 to this OA. Details of vehicles are as under: -

¶32

(a) Bearing Registration no. PB65BE4845, Engine No. PNPZ103904, Chasis No. MB1JJLHD7PPNV1367. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A25 to this OA.

¶33

(b) Bearing Registration no. PB65BE3545, Engine No. PNPZ102600, Chasis No. MB1JJLHDXPPNV0407. Form of Particulars of vehicle is Exhibit A26 to this OA.

¶34

As per the OA, the registration details of only Two Vehicles are available as details of one vehicle were not provided by the defendants.

¶35

5. Documents executed: - Sole proprietorship declaration letter, which is Annexure A2 to this OA; GSTIN Certificate dated 05.07.2017, which is Annexure A3 to this OA; Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 29.03.2022, 03.04.2023 and 24.04.2023, which are Annexure A7, A16 and A24 to this OA; Loan Recall Notices dated 05.03.2025 with POD, which is Annexure A27 (Colly) to this OA and Statement of Accounts, which are Annexures A28 to 44 (Colly) to this OA.

¶36

The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.3,89,17,358.90p, 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.

¶37

¶38

OA NO.355/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO. AND ANOTHER

¶39

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 29.07.2025.

¶40

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

¶41

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶42

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 A44 to this OA, it is proved that the defendants approached applicant for availing of the loan facilites 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 loans 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 is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.3,89,17,358.90p (Rupees Three Crore Eighty Nine Lacs Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Eight and Ninety 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.

¶43

In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @24.00%p.a. with monthly rests from 03.03.2025 till the realization.

¶44

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 loan and prevalent market rates of interest which have gone drastically downhill in yester years, while exercising the discretion vested in this Tribunal, this

¶45

¶46

OA NO.355/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS JAI MATA DURGA TRANSPORT CO. AND ANOTHER

¶47

Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all 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.

¶48

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.3,89,17,358.90p (Rupees Three Crore Eighty Nine Lacs Seventeen Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Eight and Ninety Paise Only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%p.a. in all the loan accounts 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. 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 30.10.2025. 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: 18.10.2025

¶49

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶50

Presiding Officer,

¶51

DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Messrs Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Messrs Jai Mata Durga Transport Co. and Another

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

Omkara Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus M/S Ludhiana Kolkata Transport Co. and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Sukhminder Singh Rattan

Union Bank of India versus Sh. Lakhbir Khan

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Shree Mahavir Ji Creation and Others

Icici Bank Limited versus Gujri Industries International Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Kulwant Singh and Another