Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Kiran Ramesh Borhade

DRT28 Aug 2026OA/556/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of outstanding dues of approximately Rs. 46.02 lakhs from the defendants. The court observed the absence of the defendants and quantified the relief to include future simple interest at 9% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Payment of Rs. 46,02,224.08 plus future interest at 9% p.a. simple; permission to sell hypothecated assets; issue of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Kiran Ramesh Borhade — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 18.08.2025 Registered on: 12.09.2025 Decided on: 28.08.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 00 10

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD (Before Shri Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 556/2025

¶3

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 46,02,224.08/-

¶4

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

¶5

A Registered Company, having its Registered Office at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Gujarat- 390007. And having one of its Branch Office at ICICI Bank Ltd., Adish Plaza, Near Daule Hospital, Nagar—anmad Road, Ahmednagar- 431003. Through it’s Power of Attorney Holder, Shri. Pravin Bhausaheb Gadekar, Age: 29 Years, Occ: Service, R/o: C/o: ICICI Bank Ltd., Cherikar Prestine, Plot No. 4, Opp. LIC Office, Bhagya Nagar, Adalat Road, Aurangabad431001.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

E-mail: [email protected] Mobile No.: 7276676703.

Versus

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 1 of 8

[Ambadas]

Kiran Ramesh Borhade, Age: 34 Years, Occu: Agri/Business, R/o: Near Ganpati Temple, Borhade Mala, Shirur, Tal. Shirur, Dist. Pune- 412210. Mobile No.: 9579034141. PAN: CGDPB5459B. E-mail: [email protected]

¶13

… Defendants

¶14

Shubhangi Kiran Borhade, Age: 27 Years, Occu.: Housemaker, R/o: Nagar Pune Road, Borhade Mala, Shirur, Tal. Shirur Gramin, Dist. Pune- 412210. Mobile No.: 9226244141. PAN: EBCPB5604J.

¶15

E-mail: [email protected]

¶16

APPEARANCES For the Applicant Mr. Shete Umesh N. - Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 2 of 8

[Ambadas]

J U D G M E N T

Delivered on (28.08.2026)

¶22

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs. 46,02,224.08/- (Rs. Forty-Six Lakhs, Two Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty-Four and Eight Paisa Only) together with interest with monthly rests in respect of Credit Facility from 28.05.2025 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the Defendants.

¶23

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶24

That the Defendants approached the Applicant Bank and requested for the sanction of Credit Facility. Upon considering the Defendant’s representation, request and financial needs, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the Credit Facility of Rs. 46,88,600/for purchase of machine Smart Plus R2 1 5L Hyundai Hydraulic Excavator vide credit facility application form dated 14.02.2024 on certain terms & conditions.

¶25

The agreed rate of interest for the Credit Facility was @11% p.a. with monthly rests.

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 3 of 8

[Ambadas]

In order to secure the aforesaid Credit facility, the Defendants executed loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank namely sanction letter, demand promissory note, request letter, hypothecation agreement, letter of undertaking etc.

¶30

The Applicant Bank contended that, in order to secure the said loan facility, the Defendants executed A Unattested Deed of Hypothecation dated 14.02.2024 and Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 14.02.2024, in respect of the following hypothecation in favour of the Applicant Bank:

¶31

Description of Hypothecated Vehicle: The machine Smart Plus R2 1 5L Hyundai Hydraulic Excavator is registered with the serial No. HYNDN635EE0068313.

¶32

The Applicant Bank further contended that the Defendants have failed to keep their promises and commitments agreed by them with regard to due repayment of the loan amount. The Defendants failed to operate the loan account properly and failed to pay the agreed rate of interest as per terms and

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 4 of 8

[Ambadas]

conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter the Applicant Bank repeatedly made demand of loan amount and called upon the Defendants to pay with the agreed rate of interest thereon, but the Defendants failed and neglected to pay the same. The loan account of the Defendants became irregular and classified as NPA on 30.12.2024. Therefore on 12.02.2025, the Applicant Bank issued legal notice to the Defendants through their Advocate. Despite service of Notice, the Defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the Applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶37

Despite service of summons, the Defendants neither appeared nor filed WS. Hence, they proceeded ex-parte vide Order dated 07.07.2026.

¶38

The Applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit of evidence at Exhibit-4 of Mr. Pravin Bhausaheb Gadekar, Manager of the Applicant Bank and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as Exh. AW-1/1 to AW-1/10 along-with List of documents Exh.5, which corroborates the case of the

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 5 of 8

[Ambadas]

Applicant Bank.

I have heard arguments of the learned Advocate for the Applicant Bank.

¶44

Since the Defendants failed to file written statement and did not contest the application, I find no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted evidence of the Applicant Bank. Therefore, the Applicant Bank is entitled for the reliefs as claimed.

¶45

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest at @11% p.a. with monthly rests on loan from 18.05.2025 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the Defendants. However, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that awarding future interest at @9% per annum (simple) on outstanding amount, it would be just and reasonable.

¶46

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(A) Original Application No. 556/2025 is allowed with costs.

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 6 of 8

[Ambadas]

(B) The Defendants shall pay jointly and severally to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 46,02,224.08/- (Rs. FortySix Lakhs, Two Thousand, Two Hundred Twenty-Four and Eight Paisa Only) along-with future interest at @9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 18.08.2025, till full payment/ realization of the said amount.

¶53

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by hypothecated assets in favour of the Applicant Bank vide document Exh. AW-1/5 and AW-1/6 in list of Documents Exh.5. The hypothecated asset is described as follows:

¶54

The machine Smart Plus R2 1 5L Hyundai Hydraulic Excavator is registered with the serial No. HYNDN635EE0068313.

¶55

(D) The Applicant Bank is entitled to sell the hypothecated Vehicle, assets, articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

(OA No. 556-2025)

Page 7 of 8

[Ambadas]

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶60

(F) The Registrar is directed to send the copy of the Judgment and Recovery Certificate to the applicant and Defendants.

¶61

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

Place : Aurangabad Date : 28.08.2026

¶64

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶65

(OA No. 556-2025)

¶66

Page 8 of 8

¶67

[Ambadas]

Icici Bank Limited v. Kiran Ramesh Borhade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Kiran Ramesh Borhade

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Ramdas Narayan Matore

Bank of India versus Mr. Narayan Baburao Shame

Central Bank of India versus Dashrath Pundlik Sonawane

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Ovesh Fruit Company

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Riddhi Logistics and Multi Services

Bank of Maharashtra versus Ashok Rohidas Kotkar