Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Damandeep Singh and Others

DRT28 Jul 2025OA/751/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed an Original Application under Section 19 RDB Act for recovery of a bank loan. The court declared respondents jointly and severally liable for the principal sum and granted relief.

What did the court decide?

Granted recovery of Rs.31,82,210.59 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from date of filing until realization. Recoverable from mortgaged properties or personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Damandeep Singh and Others — Arbitration | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.751/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 23.05.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 28.07.2025

¶6

ICICI BANK LTD., a body corporate incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949 and having its registered office at 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 No.132134, sector-9-C, Chandigarh through its authorized signatory Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Damandeep Singh S/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh R/o Village Takhtumajra (62) , Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala Punjab- 140701.

¶10

Sh. Gurdit Singh S/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh R/o Village Takhtumajra (62) , Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala Punjab140701.

¶11

Kulwant Kaur D/o Sh. Ishar Singh R/o Village Takhtumajra (62) , Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala Punjab-140701.

¶12

….……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by, Sh. Manav Singal, Advocate for Applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex parte

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.31,82,210.59p (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Two Hundred Ten & Fifty Nine Paise only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh.

¶18

2 OA/751/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS SH. DAMANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS

¶19

Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory o f the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 08.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 tothis OA.

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for the grant of KCC Limit of Rs.24.90 Lacs vide Credit facility application form dated 06.01.2022, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.24.90 Lacs vide Sanction letter dated 13.01.2022, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendants had hypothecated their immovable properties i.e. Total land measuring 24Bigha detailed as under: - a. land measuring 19Bigha 04Biswa, in the name of defendant nos. 1 and 2 situated at Village Takhtumajra, Hadbast no. 62, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala Punjab b. Land measuring 4Bigha 16Biswa, in the name of defendant no. 3, situated at Village Takhtumajra, Hadbast no. 62, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala Punjab, vide Declaration u/s 4(1) dated 20.01.2022 & Letter to Sub Registrar for Creation of Charge, bearing no. 458 dated 20.01.2022 which are Annexures A5 & A6 to this OA. Documents executed: -Hypothecation deed dated 20.01.2022, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Loan recall notice dated 12.08.2024, along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A7 to this OA and statements of accounts, which is Annexure A8 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.31,82,210.59p, which his 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/751/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS SH. DAMANDEEP SINGH 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 24.07.2025.

¶25

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory, ICICI BANK LTD, h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶26

It was argued by learned counsel 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 A8 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 applicant. 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.31,82,210.59p (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Two Hundred Ten & Fifty Nine 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.

¶27

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. from 30.04.2025 till the realization.

¶28

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, 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 Tribunal deems it just and appropriate to grant uniform simple interest @8.00%p.a. in

¶29

¶30

OA/751/2025

¶31

ICICI BANK LIMITED VS SH. DAMANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS

¶32

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.

¶33

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.31,82,210.59p (Rupees Thirty One Lacs Eighty Two Thousand Two Hundred Ten & Fifty Nine Paise only) jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00%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/mortgaged properties 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 04.09.2025. 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: 28.07.2025. (MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Damandeep Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Damandeep Singh 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. Navdeep Singh Sohal and Another

State Bank of India versus Bhj Restro Private Limited and Others

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Ranjit Singh and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Mahain Singh and Others

Uco Bank versus Sh. Ajay Kumar Koundal and Another

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Sh. Baldev Singh and Another