Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Countrywide Car Rental India Pvt. Ltd.

DRT17 Jun 2025TA/598/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application by ICICI Bank Limited for recovery of loan dues of Rs.45,25,519.94 plus interest. Defendants were absent. The Tribunal directed payment within 30 days and issuance of recovery certificate for enforcement via sale of hypothecated vehicle and other assets.

What did the court decide?

Direct defendants to pay Rupees 45,25,519.94 plus interest and costs within 30 days; issue recovery certificate for sale of hypothecated vehicle and other assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Countrywide Car Rental… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No.598 of 2023

¶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. 598 of 2023

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited Having its branch office at: R-846, New Rajinder Nagar New Delhi-110060 Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Countrywide Car Rental India Pvt.Ltd. Through its director Ms Ganga Pandey, Borrower F-11/12, Triveni Complex Sheikh Sarai Phase New Delhi-110017

¶8

Ms Ganga Pandey w/o Mohan Chandra Pandey (Co-Borrower/Director of Defendant No.1 & Partner of Defendant no.3) R/o D-59, Second Floor, Saket, New Delhi-110017

¶9

International Tourist Co. (Guarantor) F-11/12, Triveni Complex Sheikh Sarai Phase I, New Delhi-110017

¶10

Sh.Mohan Pandey s/o Leela Dhar Pandey (Partner) R/o D-59, Second Floor, Saket, New Delhi-110017

¶11

Sh.Jagdish Pandey s/o Leela Dhar Pandey (Partner) R/o D-181, 2nd Floor, Saket New Delhi-110017

¶12

¶13

T.A. No.598 of 2023

¶14

Sh.Madan Mohan Pandey s/o Leela Dhar Pandey (Partner)

¶15

R/o H-18/18, 1st Floor, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi-110017 Defendants

¶16

Present: Shri Rachit Bigghe, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶17

Date of Institution: 25.02.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 17.06.2025

¶18

FINAL ORDER

¶19

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 25.02.2021 before DRT-III Delhi & then transferred to DRT-I Delhi through Shri Dinesh Sharma, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of the Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 read with Rule 8 of Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.45,25,519.94 (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Twenty Five Thousand Five Hundred Nineteen and paisa Ninety Four only) as on 16.02.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.51% per annum with monthly rest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs.

¶20

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 as Private Limited Company, defendant no.2 as borrower and defendant no.3 being partnership firm of defendant no.2, 4 and 6 vide their loan application dated 09.03.2020, the applicant bank sanctioned Vehicle Loan of Rs.49,51,000/- and disbursed Rs.49,43,870/- (Rupees Forty Nine Lacs Forty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy only) to M/s T and T Motors Ltd. on 09.03.2020 @9.51% rate of

¶21

¶22

T.A. No.598 of 2023

¶23

interest per annum to be repayable in 48 EMIs of Rs.1,24,441/for purchase of Mercedes Benz / E-Class 220 CDI AT car. The defendants further agreed to pay penal interest @24% p.a. on the outstanding equated monthly installments amount and applicant bank entitled to take possession of vehicles in case of default in making payments of installments by the defendants.

¶24

That in order to avail the said car loan facility, the defendants executed Credit Facility Application along with Terms and Conditions of the Loan, Unattested Deed of Hypothecation and Deed of Guarantee by defendant no.3 on 09.03.2020 in favour of applicant bank.

¶25

That in order to secure the car loan facility, the defendants hypothecated the vehicle namely "Mercedes Benz/E-Class 220 CDI AT" having Registration No. HR38AB8261, Engine No.65492080407465 and Chasis No. WDD2131046L025523 in favour of applicant bank duly registered with registration authority.

¶26

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 despite several request and reminders and failed to make the vehicle available for inspection in consonance with the agreement entered with the applicant bank. The applicant bank terminated the agreement and recall the loan through legal notice dated 11.11.2020 to adjust the outstanding amount along with interest and handover the possession of vehicle but defendants failed to comply the notice issued. Hence, the applicant bank has approached this Tribunal for recovery of their dues.

¶27

T.A. No.598 of 2023

¶28

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 27.03.2025, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal and even no written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed by the defendants.

¶29

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, Deed of Guarantee Ex-AW1/D, Recall Notice Ex-AW1/E, Postal Receipts Ex-AW1/F, Statement of Account Ex-AW1/G.

¶30

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.

¶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.

T.A. No.598 of 2023

ORDER

allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.45,25,519.94 (Rupees Forty Five Lacs Twenty Five Thousand Five Hundred Nineteen and paisa Ninety Four only) as on 16.02.2021 along with pendentelite and future interest @9.51% interest per annum with monthly rests from date of filing of this application and costs failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from sale of hypothecated vehicle namely "Mercedes Benz/E-Class 220 CDI AT" having Registration No. HR38AB-8261, Engine No.65492080407465 and Chasis No. WDD2131046L025523. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable assets of the defendants.

¶38

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

¶39

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 18.08.2025.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 17.06.2025

¶43

Icici Bank Limited v. Countrywide Car Rental India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Countrywide Car Rental India 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

Anish Anakkal Balan versus Idbi Bank

Ms B S Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. Director Dilip Satynarayan Agrawal versus Indian Bank

Jyotsna Chakraborty Das versus Canara Bank

Mammu v versus Punjab National Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Aniraj Chauhan

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Poonam Industries