Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Ms Mangalam Enterprises and Anr.

DRT27 Aug 2026OA/374/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's original application for recovery of a loan of Rs. 39,50,829.73 and principal interest against defendants who did not appear. A recovery certificate was directed to be issued for enforcement.

What did the court decide?

The defendants were directed to pay Rs. 39,50,829.73 with interest within 30 days, and a recovery certificate was issued to the Recovery Officer.

Icici Bank Limited versus Ms Mangalam Enterprises and Anr. — DRT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

O.A. No. 374 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

O.A. No. 374 of 2023
ICICI Bank Ltd. Shal Tower, Plot No.23, New Rohtak Ro d, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005	Applicant
Versus
1.M/s Mangalam Enterprises Through its partners
R/o 416, 1st Floor, FIE Industrial Area Patparganj, East Delhi-110092
Also at:
R/o 377, FIE Industrial Area, Patparganj, East Delhi-110092
2.Sh.Sarvottam Panchal s/o L.C.Panchal R/o B-110, Ganga Vihar, Gokal Puri Mandawali, Delhi-110094	Defendants

¶5

Present: Shri Yash Tiwari, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 14.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 27.08.2026

¶6

FINAL ORDER

¶7

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 04.04.2023 through Shri Nitesh Vashisht, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,50,829.73 (Rupees Thirty Nine lacs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Nine & paisa Seventy Three only) as on 03.02.2023 together with

¶8

Sc)-

¶9

O.A. No. 374 of 2023

¶10

pendentelite and future interest @18% per annum from the date of filing of this application till its realization with costs.

¶11

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant no.1 through its partners / guarantors being defendant no.2 and Mrs.Pooja Panchal (since deceased), the applicant bank sanctioned Overdraft facility of Rs.35,00,000/(Rupees Thirty Five lacs only) on 15.03.2019 @I-MCLR6M+0.90% interest per annum which was renewed on 29.02.2020 @ Repo Rate+4.35% interest per annum for 0-90 days.

¶12

In order to avail the credit facility, the defendant no.1 through defendant no.1 and Ms Pooja Panchal (since deceased) submitted loan application dated 05.03.2019 along with necessary documents and executed Credit Agreement Letter dated 15.03.2019, Letter of Renewal and Letter of Amendment dated 29.02.2020 and agreed to pay processing Fe @2% per annum of the sanctioned facility plus applicable taxes.

¶13

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the aforesaid loan facility, the defendants failed to adhere to the financial discipline of the repayment of loan facility and interest despite reminders of applicant bank The applicant bank was constrained to declare the account of defendants as NPA on 17.07.2021 in terms of RBI guidelines and issued loan recall notice dated 07.06.2022 terminated the agreement and called upon the defendants to make the payment of dues as on 31.05.2022 but defendants did not deposit any amount to clear the dues of the applicant bank.

O.A. No. 374 of 2023

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 14.08.2026, 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.

¶18

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Nitesh Vashisht, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Power of Attorney Ex AW1/1, Credit Arrangement Letter Ex-AW1/2, Deed of Guarantee Ex-AW1/3, Letter of Renewal of Overdraft Facility Ex-AW1/4, NPA Certificate Ex-AW1/5, Loan Recall Notice Ex-AW1/6, Statement of Account Ex-AW1/7, 'Affidavit of Signatures Affidavit in terms of Section 65B of Evidence Act Ex.AW1/A, Affidavit in terms of Section 658 of Evidence Act Ex.AW1/B and Affidavit in terms of Section 2A of Banker's Books of Evidence Act Affidavit in terms of Section 65B of Evidence Act Ex.AW1/ .

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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

O.A. No. 374 of 2023

ORDER

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days, jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.39,50,829.73 (Rupees Thirty Nine lacs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Nine & paisa Seventy Three only) as on 03.02.2023 together with pendentelite and future interest @18.00% per annum along with costs from 03.02.2023 till the date of its realization. In case of default, the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of moveable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶26

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

¶27

(III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 26.10.2026.

¶28

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

¶29

(GOVIND BALLAnCARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶30

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 27.08.2026

¶31

Icici Bank Limited v. Ms Mangalam Enterprises and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Ms Mangalam Enterprises 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Shilpy

Bank of India versus Sh. Hardev Singh

Bank of India versus Amarjit Kaur

Santosh Kumari versus Central Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Mokksh

Ms Tamanna Enterprises versus Indian Bank