Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Rk Associates

DRT24 Aug 2026OA/513/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by ICICI Bank Ltd. against Sh. Ranjeet Kumar Barua for recovery of outstanding overdraft dues totaling Rs. 22,70,749.35, interest, and costs following an ex-parte proceeding due to the defendant's absence. Interest was fixed at 12% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs. 22,70,749.35 with pendent lite interest @12% p.a. from 01.07.2024 and costs; recovery certificate issued.

Icici Bank Limited versus Rk Associates — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th floor, ieevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

¶5

ICICI Bank Ltd.

¶6

Plot No.7, Community Centre S.D.Tower, Sector-8, Rohini Delhi-110085

¶7

Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh.Ranjeet Kumar Barua Proprietor of R.K.Associates 31G, Mayur Vihar Phase III Pocket 2, DDA Flats ' New Kondli, Gharauli, Delhi-110096

¶10

Defendant

¶11

Present: Shri Aditya Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank

¶12

Date of Reserve: 06.08.2026

¶13

Date of Pronouncement: 24.08.2026

¶14

FINAL ORDER

¶15

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 29.07.2024 through Shri Amardeep Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.22,70,749.35 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Nine & paisa Thirty Five only) together with pendentelite and future interest @24% per annum till its realization with costs.

¶16

The brief facts of the case are that on the request of defendant through its proprietor Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Barua

-W3

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

maintaining current account with applicant bank submitted application thru Corporate Internet Banking on 08.04.2019, the applicant bank sanctioned Overdraft facility of Rs.15,00,000/(Rupees Fifteen Lacs only) on 08.04.2019 @interest rate of I- MCLR-6M i.e. 8.70% per annum and spread of @7.50% per annum for a period of 12 month from the date of drawl of the overdraft facility. The defendant acknowledged and accepted the terms and conditions by filling up requisite details on Corporate Internet Banking / Mobile Pay app and agreed to comply with terms of loan agreement and also accepted the rate of interest/processing fee/ final loan amount / EMI amount and repayment tenure etc. The Insta overdraft facility were renewed / modified from time to time at the request of defendant.

¶21

In order to avail the Insta Overdraft facility, the defendant executed Insta Overdraft Facility (Insta OD), Director Debit Mandate Form, Standard Terms and ConditionsCurrent account unsecured overdraft and schedule of charge etc. on 08.4.2019 in favour of applicant bank.

¶22

It has been submitted by the applicant that after availing the Insta Overdraft facility, the defendant failed to adhere to the financial discipline and acted contrary to the terms and conditions despite reminders. The applicant bank granted several opportunities to defendant for regularization of the account but he neglected. The applicant bank declared the account as NPA on 26.04.2023 in accordance with RBI guidelines and issued notice dated 28.04.2023 recalled the overdraft facility calling upon the defendant to make the payment of contractual dues of Rs.18,17,806/- along with interest and charges but the defendant did not clear the dues

¶23

¶24

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

¶25

of the applicant bank hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶26

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 13.08.2025, the defendant has been proceeded ex-parte as not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets have been filed.

¶27

In order to prove its case, the applicant bank has filed its evidence by way of affidavit of Shri Amardeep Singh, authorized representative of the applicant bank who has proved the documents such as Power of Attorney ExAW1/1(OSR), Insta Overdraft Facility Ex-AW1/2, Direct Debit Mandate Form Ex-AW1/3, Sole Proprietorship Letter Ex-AW1/4, Standard Terms & Conditions — Current Account Unsecured Overdrfaft Ex-AW1/5„ Insta OD Schedule of Charge Ex-AW1/6, Loan Recall Notice Ex-AW1/7, Statement of Account Ex-AW1/8, Certificate u/s 2A of Banker's Book of Evidence Act Ex-AW1/9 and Certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act 1872 ExAW1/10.

¶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

¶31

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

¶32

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between, the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶33

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

¶34

ORDER

¶35

I, allow this OA and direct the defendant to pay to the applicant bank within 30 days, a sum of Rs.22,70,749.35 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Seventy Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Nine & paisa Thirty Five only) as on 30.06.2024 together with pendentelite interest @12.00% per annum from 01.07.2024 till the date of realization and costs. In case of default, the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of moveable and immovable properties of the defendant.

¶36

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

¶37

(III)^{Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer,} DRT I, Delhi on 27.10.2026.

¶38

¶39

O.A. No. 513 of 2024

¶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: 24.08.2026

¶43

Icici Bank Limited v. Rk Associates

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Rk Associates

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Pavithra E

Mohammad Azeem Shad and another versus Fullerton India housing finance company limited

Mohd Naseemuddin versus Icici Bank Limited

Hdfc Bank versus Karan Vohra

Uco Bank versus Shri Sher Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Gopal Enterprises