Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Niranjan Enterprises

DRT17 Dec 2025OA/540/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the original application filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 28,18,251.84 ps along with interest. The court found the defendants jointly and severally liable after noting the lack of supporting material for their defense.

What did the court decide?

Defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally liable to pay total sum of Rs.28,18,251.84 p.s with interest @12% p.a.; applicant entitled to proceed against persons and properties; costs awarded.

Icici Bank Limited versus Niranjan Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN THE^{DEBTSRECOVERY TRIBUNAL'IIAT HYDERABAD} DATED^{THIS THE17THDAY OF DECEMBER'2025}

¶2

PRESENT:SH.RAMESHWARKOTHE,B.COM,L.LB.(HONS.),M.A. PRESIDING^OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL^{APPLICATIONNO' 540 OF 2024}

¶4

ICICI^{Bank Limited} Gachbowli,^{ICICI Towers} SerilingamPallY^Mandal Ranga^{neOOYDist'ReP bY its} Authorised^SignatorY'

¶5

.......APPlicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

NiranjanEnterPrises neP nY^{its Proprietorship/} PartnershiP/Trust Rohit^{Kumar lain} s-t-goa,^{302 LibertY X Road} Mahavir^Chambers Beside Petrol^PumP HimaYatnagar-⁵⁰⁰⁰²⁹ HYderabad,^Telangana'

¶8

Rohit^{Kumr lain} S/o^{Ramesh Kumar} noe: 38,^{Occ: Personal} i-"6-*i,^{302 LibertYX Road} Mahavir^Chambers Beside^PetrolPumP iimaYatnagar-500029 ..... Defendants' Hyderabad,^Telangana'

¶9

Counsel^{for the Applicant : Mr' G' Ardrian Kiran Raj'} Counsel^{for the Defendants : Mr' D'S' PavanKumar'}

¶10

:: ORDER::

¶11

The Applicant^{Bank filed the present OA u/s 19 of The Recovery} of Debts^{& BankruptcyAct' 1993 for recovery of a sum of} ,A'rn;u U'^n't'

¶12

¶13

0A.s40/2024

¶14

Rs.28,1g,251,g4ps from the defendants with future interest @240/o per annum with monthly rests trom 25.70.2024tiil the date of realisation along with costs.

¶15

2. The averments

¶16

Derendant -" ,:T:"r:1.'lll]ljil,. and derendant No.2 the co_applicant availed personal loan of rs.40 lakhs on 15.05.2023 and the rate of interest chargeable to th to time ' " 0""'"""lii;:1i1l#l:T 25o/o perunnrrt''" and cond t on, ": ;",'""J,'." IJi;l"liJ;l::iiff:: ,:il: financial discipline in repayment of loa interest for severat months. Appticanr ,r:r::::#r# :111: dated 13.09.2024. The present OA is filed to recover the outstanding dues from the defendants against the loan account.

¶17

Defendant filed written statement. The av erments of the written statement, in brief, are;

¶18

The allegations a averments are invented to file the oA. After firing o, ,rno dues. Defendants 3 1.01.202s ",0 *,"o,ii#:::T:r:l1ri:#H i; not wilful defaulters and the default was on account o,or.u." ,n business and pendency of bills with the Government. ,, ,, d eren da n ts *, o:, i^:lTil:, "::,:-,r::^{J:.i:::. ril"."} lli; interest is very high. The loun u..orrt i, ,non as personal loan in the name of the Firm instead of business loan. With these pleadings, defendants prayed for dismissal of the OA.

¶19

o A.54012024

¶20

In order to^{prove its claim, Applicant Bank examinedK'} Rajayaswanth,^{Manager, as AW-1 and marked 7 documents} through^{him as Ex. A.1 to Ex. A'7'}

¶21

Defendants^{right of adducing evidence was forfeited on} 10. 1 1.2025^{for non-representation'}

¶22

Learned counsel^{appearingfor the applicant bank reportedno} oral arguments.^{Defendants' right of arguments forfeited on} 08.12.2025^{fornon-representation' Perused the written}

¶23

arguments^{filed by the applicantbank and the materialplaced} on record.

¶24

¶25

The^point that^{arises for consideration is:-}

¶26

Whether the^{Applicant Bank is entitled} for the OA^{claim against the} Defendants^{1 and 2?}

¶27

There is no^{disputeover the availmentof loan and default in} repayment^{thereafter' It is the case of the defendants that the} default^{is on account of business loss and non-receipt bills from} the Government^{for the contract work undertaken by them'} Defendants^{are willing to clear the dues provided applicantbank} restructures^{the loan' In spite of pleadingon these counts'} defendantsdonotSeemtohaveapproachedtheapplicantin this regard^{except makingthesestatements in the written} statements.^{Itis settled law that mere assertions without} supporting^{material papers are of no use' Accordingly' I hold} thatdefendantsland2arejointlyandseverallyliabletopay costs. 6,r

¶28

¶29

oA.540t2024

¶30

In the result, the present Original Application No.540/2024 is

¶31

allowed as under: -

¶32

i) defendants 1 and 2 are joinUy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a total sum of Rs.28,18,251.B4ps along with interest @72o/o per annum simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶33

ii) the applicant bank is entiiled to proceed against the person and properties of the defendants for realization of its dues; and

¶34

iii) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶35

The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶36

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶37

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned and upload in official Web portat.

¶38

l:;:H:.t:#Iil:;'l*""'o pronounced bv me in the open court on this the 17th

¶39

Hf'ee E_SHWAR KOTHE) PRESIDING OFFICE(

Icici Bank Limited v. Niranjan Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Niranjan Enterprises

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

Bank of Baroda versus Varikuppala Yadaiah

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Pagilla Salaiah

Punjab National Bank versus Mr. Koneti Thirupathi

Union Bank of India versus M/s. Mahalakshmi Industries

Bank of Maharashtra versus Challa Himaja

The Axis Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Uppuganti Jayapal Reddy