Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Yadwinder Singh and Another

DRT23 Sept 2025OA/983/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ICICI Bank Ltd. sought recovery of Rs.23,71,285/- from defendants under RDBA for an irregular KCC loan. The Tribunal allowed the application ex-parte, rejected the claimed high interest rate, and awarded simple interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.23,71,285/- plus simple interest at 8% p.a. from the filing date until realization; issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Yadwinder Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.983/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 28.07.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 23.09.2025

¶6

ICICI BANK Ltd., having its registered office at Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, 390-007, Gujarat Inter Alia having a bank branch at Chabal, District Tarn Taran, Punjab through its attorney/authorized representative Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Manager.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Yadwinder Singh S/o Sh. Manjit Singh R/o Village Mari Samra, Tehsil Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran -143303.

¶10

Smt. Jaspreet Kaur W/o Sh. Yadwinder Singh R/o Village Mari Samra, Tehsil Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran -143303.

¶11

….……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. J.S. Sehgal, Advocate for Applicant

¶14

Defendants already 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.23,71,285.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Five Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Manager of the applicant, who is competent to institute the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 08.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶17

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants had approached the applicant for KCC Limit of Rs. 25.00 Lacs vide Credit Facility Application dated 20.07.2021, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶18

2 OA NO. 983/2025

¶19

ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SH. YADWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶20

3. The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.15.00 Lacs vide
Sanction letter dated 27.07.2021, which isAnnexure A3to this OA and
the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.
4. Defendant no.1 had mortgaged his immovable properties i.e.
Land measuring 44K-16M situated at Village Allgo III, Hadbast No. 95,
Tehsil Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Schedule Declaration under Section 4(1) dated 25.08.2021, along with its Translation, which areAnnexures A5 & A6to this OA.
Documents executed:- Hypothecation Deed dated 31.08.2021, which isAnnexure A4to this OA; Notices along with postal receipts dated 03.04.2025, which areAnnexures A7 & A8to this OA and Statement of Account, which isAnnexure A9to this OA.
5. 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.23,71,285.00p, 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.
6. 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 17.09.2025.
7. In support of the OA, affidavit ofSh. Jatinder Mishra, Manager,
ICICI BANK Ltd.,has been filed.
8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.
9. 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 theAnnexures A1 to A9
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

¶21

3 OA NO. 983/2025

¶22

ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SH. YADWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶23

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.23,71,285.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Five Only) rest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶24

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.50% p.a. with penal interest of @2% p.a. with half yearly rests from 30.04.2025 till the realization.

¶25

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 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.

¶26

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.23,71,285.00p (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Seventy One Thousand Two Hundred Eighty Five 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

¶27

4 OA NO. 983/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SH. YADWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶28

of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶29

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶31

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 15.10.2025.

¶32

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 .

¶33

Dated: 23.09.2025

¶34

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Yadwinder Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Yadwinder Singh 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

State Bank of India versus M/S New Dashmesh Agro Industries and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Resham Singh and Another

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Neeru Khosla

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Ravideep Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Beant Singh

State Bank of India versus Sh. Gurjind Singh