Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

DRT13 Oct 2025TA/3311/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an original application by ICICI Bank for recovery of outstanding loan dues against Hitani Enterprises and a guarantor. The court confirmed the case was proven unrebutted and directed payment of the principal amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs.45,00,275.50 plus interest and recovery from hypothecated assets in case of shortfall.

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

¶1

T.A. No.3311 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. 3311 of 2022

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited

¶6

Block E, Videocon Tower Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-110055

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Through its Director

¶10

Mr. Tarun Gupta Ground floor, Khasra no.12/25 Sewadham Road, Main Mandoli Delhi-110093

¶11

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

¶12

Present: Shri Rachit Bigghe, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 16.09.2025

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 13.10.2025

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 30.01.2020 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 and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the

¶16

¶17

T.A. No.3311 of 2022

¶18

defendant for recovery of Rs.45,00,275.50 (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Two Hundred Seventy Five and paisa Fifty only) as on 17.10.2019 alongwith pendentelite and future interest @10.52% per annum from the date of filing this application till its realization in full and cost.

¶19

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 being private limited company and defendant no.2 as guarantor vide loan application dated 24.12.2018, the applicant bank sanctioned Construction Equipment loans for Rs.48,97,000/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand only) on 09.01.2019 @10.52% per annum for purchase of 2 Construction Equipment namely 'Schwing Loader/LW300FN & Putzmeister Concrete Pump/BSF 1407D', and disbursed Rs.23,75,308.01 to M/s Schwing Steller India Pvt.Ltd and Rs.25,12,000/- to M/s Putzmeister Concrete Machines Pvt.Ltd. Both the Construction Equipment loans were to repayable in 35 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.79,215/and Rs.83,775/- each.

¶20

That in order to avail both the loan facilities, the defendants submitted loan application and executed Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation, Irrevocable Power of Attorney and Deed of Guarantee on 24.12.2018 with the applicant bank.

¶21

That in order to secure the loan facilities, the defendants hypothecated 2 Construction Equipments namely ‘Schwing Loader/LW300FN and Putzmeister Concrete Pump/BSF 1407D' having Serial no. A100242657 & 100242657' with the applicant bank.

¶22

¶23

T.A. No.3311 of 2022 .

¶24

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 several request and reminders, the defendants failed to pay the outstanding dues and monthly installments in time to the applicant bank. The applicant bank terminated the agreements and issued loan recall notice dated 03.09.2019 to adjust the outstanding amount along with interest and also handover peaceful possession of both Construction Equipments, but defendants have failed to comply with the notice. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶25

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendant and despite proper service, the defendant has chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 13.06.2022 of this Tribunal, right to file written statements stands closed and vide order 15.01.2024, the defendants have been proceeded exparte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendant.

¶26

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. Dinesh Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank, who has proved the documents as Power of Attorney, Credit facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan, Unattested deed of Hypothecation, Irrevocable Power of Attorney, Deed of Guarantee, Recall Notice and Receipts, Statement of Account marked as Ex.AW-1/A to Ex.AW-1/G.

¶27

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the

¶28

¶29

T.A. No.3311 of 2022

¶30

applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly proved.

¶31

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.

¶32

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

¶33

ORDER

¶34

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.45,00,275.50/- (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Two Hundred Seventy Five and Paisa Fifty only) alongwith pendentelite and future interest @10.52% per annum from the date of filing this application till its realization in full, failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated 2 Construction Equipment namely 'Schwing Loader/LW300FN & Putzmeister Concrete Pump/BSF 1407D' having Serial no. A100242657 & 100242657 with applicant bank. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶35

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

¶36

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery} Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 12.12.2025.

¶37

¶38

T.A. No.3311 of 2022

¶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

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 13.10.2025

¶42

Icici Bank Limited v. Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Hitani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

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 Teotia Automobile Company

Santosh Jain versus Punjab National Bank

Uco Bank versus Sh Lalji Yadav

Bank of India versus Shree Pawan Housiery

Canara Bank versus Srn Industries

Icici Bank Limited versus Gundappa Upaleppa