Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Mr Harendra Kumar

DRT17 Dec 2025OA/552/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of an ex-parte Original Application filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of dues totaling 37.47 lakh Rupees along with interest from the defendants who failed to repay their housing loan despite default and non-payment of legal notice.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued; defendants directed to pay dues within two months; mortgage and personal properties liable to be sold.

Icici Bank Limited versus Mr Harendra Kumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

b J

¶2

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW

¶3

Dateoforderor }roceeding	Order withsignatureofcourt	Officeaction taken withdate
O.A. No.552/2022 17.11.2025	This case was reserved for order,but, judgmentcould notbe prepaRed.
	Putup order. on 15.12.2025for
	Order be uploaded onthe Tribunal’swebsite.
	D <br>(PravasKumar Singh) PresidingOfficer

¶4

¶5

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT LUCKNOW

¶6

Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer

¶7

Case No. Original Application No.552 of 2022

¶8

Dated: 15.12.2025

¶9

ICICI Bank Limited, having Branch at 11 MG Marg, Hazratganj, Lucknow.

¶10

........Applicant Bank

¶11

Versus 1. Mr. Harendra Kumar, S/o Shri Mangali Prasad Sinha, R/o 604, Semwing A Shipra Shrit 6th Floor, Ahinsa Khand-2, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad-201010, UP. Also: Flat No.E-12A06, 13th Floor Tower-E Gayatri, Aura Plot No.GH-11, Sector-1, Greater Noida, -201307, UP. 2. Mrs. Sangita Sinha, W/o Mr. Harendra Kumar, R/o 604, Semwing A Shipra Shrit 6th Floor, Ahinsa I<hand-2, Indira pu ram, Ghaziabad-201010, UP. Also: Flat No.E-12A06, 13th Floor Tower E Gayatri, Aura Plot No.GH-11, Sector-1, Greater Noida,-201307, UP. 3. M/s. Gayatri Hospitality And Realcon Ltd., Reg. Office-9/5298, Old Seelampur, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-110031. Limited, having its corporate office at B-

¶12

Defendants

¶13

Ld. Counsel for the applicant-bank : Mr. Manoj Chopra, Advocate. Ld. Counsel for the defendants : None

¶14

JUDGEMENT

¶15

This Original Application has been filed by the applicant Bank

¶16

under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993,

¶17

2 O.A. No.552 of 2022

¶18

against the defendants for the recovery of Rs.37,00,474/- (Rupees ThirtY Seven Lac, Four Hundred Seventy Four Only) together with pendent-lite and future interest, costs and other reliefs etc.

¶19

The brief facts of case are that the defendant nos.I & 2 are borrowers and the defendant No.3 is builder. The defendant nos.1 & 2 vide loan application approached the applicant-bank for grant of housing loan of Rs.38.24 lac, which was duly considered and sanctioned by the bank vide sanction letter dated 26.7.2016 on certain terms and conditions (Exhibit No. A-2 & Exhibit No.A-3) to this original application.

¶20

To secure the aforesaid housing loan facility, the defendant nos.1 & 2 had executed and signed Loan Agreement in favour of the applicantbank on 03.8.2016 (Exhibit No.A-4) to this original application.

¶21

Further, in order to secure the repayment of bank dues, the defendant nos.I & 2 had created mortgage of immovable property i.e. Property situated in Group Housing Project, being Flat No.E-12A06, 13th Floor Tower-E Gayatri, Aura Plot No.GH-11, Sector-1, Greater Noida201307, UP as detailed in the petition in favour of the bank. The defendant no.3/builder has written permission to mortgage the secured assets (Exhibit No.A-8 & Exhibit No.A-9) to this original application.

¶22

For availing the aforesaid housing loan facility, the applicant Bank had opened a loan account in the name of the defendant no.1 in order to maintain the account of the said loan facility.

¶23

After availing the aforesaid housing loan facility, the defendants failed to maintain financial discipline and also failed to comply with the

¶24

\J/

¶25

O.A. No.552 of 2022

¶26

terms and conditions of the loan agreement, consequently, the said loan account of the defendant no.1 was classified as NPA on 06.5.2021 by the applicant Bank as per RBI guideline (Exhibit No.A-6), therefore, the applicant-bank issued Legal Notice dated 14.6.2021 (Exhibit No.A-5) to the defendants, but they failed to repay the same and the loan account of the defendant no.1 is still un-liquidated, hence, this Original Application has been instituted.

¶27

As per books of the bank maintained in the usual and ordinary course of banking business, an outstanding of Rs.37,00,474/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lac, Four Hundred Seventy Four Only)including interest upto 07.02.2022 in the loan account of defendant no.1 were lying due for payment, for which the defendants are liable to repay the same, which theY did not pay despite repeated requests and demands. The applicant Bank has filed the copy of Statement of Account (Exhibit No.A-7) to this original application.

¶28

The cause of action for filing the present application arose firstly on 26.7.2016 when the applicant-bank sanctioned the housing loan facility and the same were availed by the defendants and necessary documents were executed by defendants and finally on 14.6.2021, when the applicant bank had sent Legal Notice to the defendants/ recalling the entire outstanding dues and they failed to pay the same.

¶29

The summons was served upon the defendants through paper publication as well as by registered post, but the defendants did not appear before this Tribunal to contest the case and the case was heard

¶30

O.A. No.552 of 2022

¶31

ex-parte on 11.10.2024, hence, the matter proceeded ex-parte against the defendants.

¶32

From perusal of the record, it is evident that the defendants were provided fair opportunities to contest the claim of the bank. As the defendants opted not to contest the case, so only point of consideration before this Tribunal in as to whether the bank is legally entitled to the amount as claimed in Original Application on the basis of documents and pleading submitted by it.

¶33

In support of the case, Mr. Vikas Nigam, Debt Officer of the applicant Bank has supported its case on affidavit (Exhibit No.A-10) to this original application.

¶34

On a careful scrutiny of the evidence on affidavit and Exhibit marked as (Exhibit No.A-1 to Exhibit A-12 to this original application), it is proved that the defendants had availed the housing loan facility from the applicant bank by executing loan and security documents detailed as above in favour of the applicant Bank. A perusal of the application/ evidence and documents relied upon clearly show that defendants had utilized the above housing loan facility as granted to them. The applicant bank had maintained the Books of account in the ordinary course of banking business showing disbursal of the loan amount. It further shows that bank had regularly credited the amount paid by the defendants in the books of account. The Bank had also charged interest from time to time and the entries is relevant u/s 4 of the Bankers Book Evidence Act. It

P \

O.A. No.552 of 2022

is also proved that the applicant bank’s claim is within limitation against the defendants, therefore, they are liable to pay the dues.

¶39

Accordingly, the defendants are directed to pay the balance dues to the applicant bank within a period of two months from the date of judgment failing which the applicant bank will be entitled to sell the mortgage property and personal properties of the defendants. The defendant No.3/builder is also liable to pay the dues of the applicantbank as per the terms and conditions of Tripartite Agreement.

¶40

The applicant-bank has claimed interest @15.00% per annum in the loan account together with pendent lite and future interest till the date of its realization and costs. On the basis of the foregoing discussion# interest of justice will be served if pendent-lite and future interest is granted @10.00% per annum with monthly rate on reducing balance from the date of filing of the O.A. till the date of realization with costs. 15. 1 find that the bank has proved the execution of loan documents and creation of mortgage in its favour. In the result/ the Original Application succeeds ex-parte against the defendants with costs. The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the dues of the applicant-bank and the mortgage property as well as the personal properties are liable to be sold.

¶41

It is, therefore, ordered:

¶42

(i) That the Original Application No.552 of 2022 of th, applicant bank for issuance of Recovery Certificate to the tune of Rs.37/00,474/- (Rupees Thirty Seven Lac, Four Hundred

O.A. No.552 of 2022

Seventy Four Only) together with pendent-lite and future interest @10.00% per annum from the date of filing of the Original Application i.e. 03.4.2022 till the loan is fully liquidated and costs succeeds and is hereby allowed ex-parte against the defendants. The defendant No.3/builder is also liable to pay the dues of the applicant-bank as per the terms and condition mentioned in the Tripartite Agreement.

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

The defendants are directed to pay the dues within a period of two months from the date of judgment, failing which the applicant bank will be entitled to recover the same from the secured assets, personal movables and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶51

The applicant-bank is entitled to recover aforesaid amount by sale of mortgage property (in accordance with law). The amount, if any, already recovered by sale of mortgage property or otherwise shall be adjusted towards the debt and only the balance amount shall be recoverable. If the dues of the applicant-bank still remain unsatisfied, the same shall be recovered by attachment and sale of the personal movable and immovable assets of the defendants jointly and severally. The defendants are hereby restrained by means of injunction from depleting, transferring, encumbering, alienating or in any way dealing with their properties/estates without first paying the claim of the applicant bank.

¶52

O.A. No.552 of 2022

¶53

¶54

(iV) Let Recovery Certificate be issued immediately u/s 19(22) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 by fixing 18.02.2026 before R.O., DRT, Lucknow.

¶55

Judgment is pronounced in the open court.

¶56

Dated : 15.12.2025

¶57

¶58

(Pravas Kurndr5HIgh) Presiding Officer

¶59

(Veeresh )

Icici Bank Limited v. Mr Harendra Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Mr Harendra Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Indu Nagar versus Canara Bank

Indian Bank versus M/s S S Fish Center

Ms Tulsi Trading Company versus Yes Bank

Surya Bhan Singh versus Icici Bank Limited

M S Jyoti Enviro Tech Pvt. Ltd. versus M S Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Mohd Shahid versus Hdb Financial Services Ltd.