Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

DRT18 Jan 2025TA/3250/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi allowed the bank's original application. Directing the borrowers and guarantor to pay the outstanding loan amount of Rs. 1.34 crore with interest within 30 days, or recover the sum from the sale of their hypothecated vehicles. The case was unopposed by the defendants.

What did the court decide?

Directing defendants to pay Rs. 1.34 crore with interest within 30 days; failure to comply mandates recovery from sale of hypothecated vehicles.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Hitani Enterprises… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A No.3250 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

T.A. No.3250 of 2022

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd. E Block, Videocon Tower Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-110055

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

M/s Hitani Enterprises Pvt.Ltd. Through its director Sh.Tarun Gupta, Borrower Ground Floor, Khasra No.12/25 Sewadham Road, Main Mandoli Delhi-110093

¶9

Sh.Nitin Gupta s/o Sh.Nirmal Gupta Guarantor R/o D-228, Vivek Vihar, Opp. Nala, Delhi-110095 Defendants

¶10

Present: Sh. Rachit Bigghe, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶11

Date of Institution: 03.02.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 18.01.2025

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 03.02.2020 filed before DRT III, Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Dinesh Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1593 read with Rule 8 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Rules 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a

¶14

T.A No.3250 of 2022

¶15

sum of Rs.1,34,65,444.34 (Rupees One Crore Thirty Four Lacs Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Forty Four and paisa Thirty Four only) as on 17.10.2019 along with pendentelite and future interest @10.53%n & @10.54% per annum from the date of filing of this application till its realization and costs.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 being private limited and defendant no.2 as guarantor vide their loan application dated 14.12.2618, the applicant bank sanctioned five Commercial loans (Chasis & Bodies) facilities and disbursed an amount of Rs.1,07,74,13/to M/s Shree Motors Pvt.Ltd. and Rs.38,50,000/- to defendant no.1 as per request on 29.12.2018 after deducting disbursement charges as per following details:

¶17

SN	Loan Amt	Commercial Vehicle	%ROI	Tenure	EMI	Disb.date
1	2160000	Eicher Pro 6025	10.54	35	72434	29.12.2018
2	2160000	Eicher Pro 6025	10.54	35	72434	29.12.2018
3	2160000	Eicher Pro 6025	10.54	35	72434	29.12.2018
4	2160000	Eicher Pro 6025	10.54	35	72434	29.12.2018
5	2160000	Eicher Pro 6025	10.54	35	72434	29.12.2018
6	770000	Transit Miser/STM7	10.53	35	25822	29.12.2018
7	770000	Transit Miser/STM7	10.53	35	25822	29.12.2018
8	770000	Transit Miser/STM7	10.53	35	25822	29.12.2018
9	770000	Transit Miser/STM7	10.53	35	25822	29.12.2018
10	770000	Transit Miser/STM7	10.53	35	25822	29.12.2018

¶18

The defendants agreed to pay penal interest @24% per annum in case of default in payment of installments and applicant bank would be entitled to take possession of the commercial • vehicles in the event of default.

¶19

That in order to avail the said loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan application dated 14.12.2018 and executed Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation, Deed of Guarantee and Irrevocable Power of Attorney with the applicant bank on 14.12.2018.

¶20

T.A No.3250 of 2022

¶21

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that in order to secure the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendant no.1 hypothecated the commercial vehicles (Chasis & Body) having Registration Nos. NL-01 AD-3040, NL-01AD-3044, NL-01AD3043, NL-01AD-3041 and NL-01AD-3042 purchased from loan availed in favour of the applicant bank.

¶22

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the aforesaid loan facilities, the defendants failed to comply with the terms and conditions and despite of several requests and reminders, the defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. Ultimately, the applicant bank issued the recall notice dated 03.09.2019 calling upon the defendants to pay the 'entire outstanding dues to the applicant bank but the defendants did not clear the dues of the applicant bank and hence the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶23

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 10.05.2022, right to file written statement have been closed as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶24

The applicant bank filed I.A.No.1542/2021 for permission to auction the vehicles which was allowed by this tribunal on 25.07.2022 to auction the hypothecated vehicle in question. The court further directed the counsel in I.A. No.1328/2022 filed by the defendants on 25.07.2022 to participate in auction proceedings to be held on 26.07.2022. The tribunal further directed the applicant bank to adjust the amount received

¶25

T.A No.3250 of 2022

¶26

through auction of the vehicles towards the dues of the applicant bank and file revised statement of account.

¶27

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Dinesh Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney Ex-AW1/A, Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan ExAW1/B, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation Ex.AW1/C, Irrevocable Power of Attorney Ex-AW1/D, Deed of Guarantee Ex-AW1/E, Recall Notice Ex.AW1/F, Receipts Ex.AW1/G, Statement of Account Ex.AW1/H.

¶28

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.

¶29

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.

¶30

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶31

ORDER

¶32

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, la sum of Rs.1,34,65,444.34 (Rupees One Crore Thirty Four Lacs Sixty Five Thousand Four Hundred Forty Four and paisa

¶33

T.A No.3250 of 2022

¶34

Thirty Four only) together with future interest @10.54% per annum from the date of filing of this O.A. till the date of realization, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of following hypothecated Vehicles with bodies:

¶35

SN	Commercial Vehicle	REGN. No.
1	Eicher Pro 6025	NL-01AD-3040
2	Eicher Pro 6025	NL-01AD-3044
3	Eicher Pro 6025	NL-01AD-3043
4	Eicher Pro 6025	NL-01AD-3041
5	Eicher Pro 6025	NL-01AD-3042

¶36

If already sold, the amount realized be credited and in case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶37

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

¶38

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 19.03.2025.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

(Pronounced in open court) Dated: 18.01.2025

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Shankar Ganpati Engineering Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.

Ms Bhaavya Pipe Pvt. Ltd. versus Indian Bank

Bank of India versus Ms Moti Construction

Uco Bank versus M/S P.R.Creation Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Shri Manish Dhanda

Canara Bank versus M/S Shresth Woods Products