Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Phuman Singh and Another

DRT19 Mar 2026OA/1421/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the bank's original application for recovery of Rs.22.35 lakhs. The court confirmed liability and appointed a Recovery Officer to execute the claim via sale of mortgaged or personal assets, while granting a reduced uniform interest rate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.22,35,100.39 with interest @8% p.a. via Recovery Officer and potential sale of mortgaged or personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Phuman Singh and Another — Arbitration | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1421/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 16.09.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.03.2026

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd., a Body Corporate, incorporated under the Companies Act. ,1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having its Registered Office at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390007 and having branches all over India and one of its branch offices situated at ICICI Bank Limited, Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab through its authorized signatory Sh. Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Phuman Singh S/o Sh. Sulakhan Singh, R/O Village Aminwala, District Moga-142042, Punjab.

¶10

Sh. Parwinderjeet Singh S/o Sh. Phuman Singh, R/O Village

¶11

Aminwala, District Moga-142042, Punjab.

¶12

.……Defendants

¶13

Advocates:

¶14

Argued by Sh. Gurnam Singh, Advocate proxy for Sh. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the applicant

¶15

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 11.02.2026

¶16

FINAL ORDER

¶17

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.22,35,100.39 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Thirty Five Thousand One Hundred & Paise Thirty Nine Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory, 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.

¶18

¶19

OA NO.1421/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS. PHUMAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶20

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants approached the applicant for availing the credit facility in the form of KCC Limit of Rs.14.00 Lacs vide application form dated 18.08.2020, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶21

The applicant sanctioned the KCC Limit of Rs.14.00 Lacs vide sanction letter dated 19.08.2020, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. 4. Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. Land measuring 44Kanal-0Marla situated at the Village Aminwala, District Dharamkot, District Moga, Punjab vide declaration dated 26.08.2020 u/s 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which is Annexure A5 to this OA. Documents executed: Hypothecation Deed dated 25.08.2020, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Recall Notice dated 03.04.2025 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A6 to this OA and Statement of account with certificate, which is Annexure A7 to this OA. 5. The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in the loan account there was a debit of Rs.22,35,100.39, 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 vide order dated 11.02.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Mr. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory, ICICI Bank Ltd. has been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted,

¶22

¶23

OA NO.1421/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS. PHUMAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶24

the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A7 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 bank. The defendants failed to pay back the loan as per terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties. Subsequently, the account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,35,100.39 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Thirty Five Thousand One Hundred & Paise Thirty Nine Only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the accounts.

¶25

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @11.85%p.a. with half yearly rests from 01.05.2025 till the realization.

¶26

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/hypothecated assets, 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.

¶27

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of

¶28

¶29

OA NO.1421/2025 ICICI BANK LTD. VS. PHUMAN SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶30

Rs.22,35,100.39 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Thirty Five Thousand One Hundred & Paise Thirty Nine 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 mortgage property/hypothecated assets 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 of the defendants. The applicant is at liberty to enforce the claim through due process of law.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of .

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 09.04.2026.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶36

Dated: 19.03.2026.

¶37

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH)

¶38

Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Phuman Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Phuman 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 Sh. Balwant Singh and Another

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Knight Detectives and Security Services Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Hdfc Bank Ltd. versus M/S Beri Industries and Another

Canara Bank versus M/S Shani Kirpa Enterprises and Another

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurpiar Singh and another

Indian Bank versus Sh. Jaspal Singh and Another