Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Hari Shiv Shakti Stone Crushing Co.

DRT21 May 2025OA/924/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT Delhi allowed the bank's Original Application for recovery of loan dues of Rs. 1.09 crore against borrowers who failed to pay installments on construction equipment loans and absconded from proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed payment of Rs. 1,09,76,873 plus interest at 12% p.a. and costs; recovery to be effected by sale of hypothecated equipment and other assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Hari Shiv Shakti Stone… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. No.924 of 2022

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No. 924 of 2022

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd.

¶6

S.D. Tower, 5th Floor

¶7

Rohini Sector-8, Delhi-110085

¶8

Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Hari Shiv Shakti Stone Crushing Co.(Borrower) Through its Proprietor Mr. Nitin Kumar UGF-53, Chiranjeev Plaza-II

¶11

Chiranjeev Vihar, Ghaziabad, UP-201002

¶12

Sh. Nitin Kumar s/o Mr. Narendra Pal (Co-applicant and Guarantor) Proprietor of Hari Shiv Shakti Stone Crushing Co. 693, Sadarpur, Kavi Nagar,

¶13

Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Defendants

¶14

Present: Ms Usha Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶15

Date of Institution: 25.10.2022

¶16

Date of Pronouncement: 21.052025

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 25.10.2022 through Ms. Alka Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,09,76,873/- (Rupees

¶19

¶20

O.A. No.924 of 2022

¶21

One Crore Nine Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three only) as on 19.05.2022 along with pendentelite and future interest on agreed / applicable rate of interest from 19.05.2022 till the date of realization and costs.

¶22

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 through its proprietor, the applicant bank sanctioned Three Construction Equipment Loans as per details:

¶23

Loan Amount	Date of Sanction	Interest Rate	Construction Equipment Detail
3143296/-	30.05.2019	13.51%	Wheel Loader CLG835
3526643/-	28.01.2020	12.26%	Tata Hiteachi Hydraulic Excavator EX210LC
3556179/-	28.01.2020	12.26%	Komatsu India Excavator PC210
2899558/-	09.07.2020	9.25%	ECLGS

¶24

The loan were disbursed as per request made by the defendants and loan was to be repayable in 47 EMIs of Rs.76,574/-, Rs.83,668/- and Rs.84,497/- respectively for Three Construction Equipment loans and 48 equated monthly installments of Rs.15,646/- in respect of ECLGS loan.

¶25

That in order to avail the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant no.2 as proprietor of defendant no.1 submitted loan applications and executed Credit Facility Agreement, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation, Irrevocable Power of Attorney, Guarantee deed in favour of the applicant bank on 30.05.2019 and 28.01.2020.

¶26

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions despite several requests and defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly

d.,

O.A. No.924 of 2022

installments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank issued loan recall notices dated 10.05.2021, 26.07.2021, 22.12.2021 but neglected by the defendants. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶31

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service through publication in newspapers, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 24.03.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the TribLial and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶32

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Ms. Alka Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents Affidavit in Evidence Ex.AW-1/1, Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/2, Application Form Ex.AW-1/3, AW-1/7 & AW-1/10, Credit Facility Agreement Form Ex.AW-1/4 & Ex.AW-1/8, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation Ex.AW-1/5 (colly) & Ex.AW1/9, Guarantee Deed Ex.AW-1/6, Irrevocable Power of Attorney Ex.AW-1/6, ECLGS Application form, Sanction Letter Ex.AW-1/11, Notices Ex.AW-1/12(colly), Certified Statement of Accounts Ex.AW-1/13(colly), Certificate u/s 2A of the Banker's Books Evidence Act as Ex.AW-1/14.

¶33

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶34

¶35

O.A. No.924 of 2022

¶36

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶37

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank and the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶38

In the light of the above discussions and documents on record, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶39

ORDER

¶40

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.1,09,76,873/- (Rupees One Crore Nine Lacs Seventy Six Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three only) along with pendentelite and future interest @12% per annum with monthly rests and costs from 19.05.2022 till the realization of the amount along with other charges, failing which the

Sci

O.A. No.924 of 2022

aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated commercial equipments namely Liugong India - Wheel Loader CLG 835, Tata Hitachi - Hydraulic Excavator EX 210 LC and Komatsu India - Excavator PC 210. In case of shortfall the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶45

(II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶46

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery} Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 21.07.2025.

¶47

(IV)^{Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be} sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶48

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶49

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 21.05.2025

¶50