Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Bapu Sukhdeo Pawar

DRT8 Jan 2026OA/631/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of dues from two borrowers who failed to repay credit loan facilities. The court found no reason to disbelieve unrebutted evidence of default. The Tribunal awarded the principal amount plus future interest at 9% per annum (simple) instead of the claimed contractual rate, relying on the hypothecated vehicle to secure the debt.

What did the court decide?

Directed defendants to pay Rs. 29,98,014.00 with future interest at 9% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing and empowered the bank to sell the hypothecated vehicle.

Icici Bank Limited versus Bapu Sukhdeo Pawar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Presented on: 17.05.2024 Registered on: 16.08.2024 Decided on: 08.01.2026 Duration: Y M D 01 07 22

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT AURANGABAD

¶3

(Before Shri Dr. J. R. Chauhan Presiding Officer) ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.631/2024

¶4

ICICI Bank Ltd.

¶5

TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT – Rs. 29,98,014.00/-

¶6

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, Plot No. 99A & 100A, Sr. No. 301, BL … Applicant

¶7

Avenue, Basmat Road, Ramkrishna Nagar,

Parbhani- 431401.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 1 of 9

[Ambadas]

Through: it’s Power of Attorney Holder

¶13

Shri. Shantanu Shailesh Naik

¶14

Age: 29 Years, Occ: Service,

¶15

R/o: C/o. ICICI Bank Ltd, Cherikar Prestine, Plot No. 4, Opp. LIC Office, Bhagya Nagar,

¶16

Adalat Road, Aurangabad- 431001.

¶17

Versus

¶18

Mr. Bapu Sukhdeo Pawar,

¶19

… Defendant's

¶20

Age: 32 Years, Occ. : Business, R/o. H.. No. 1382, Shindenagar,

¶21

Deogaon Rangari, Lamangaon,

¶22

Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad 431115.

Mobile:- 9075351333

PAN:- BTOPP5173K.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 2 of 9

[Ambadas]

Mr. Dnyaneshwar Sukhdeo Pawar,

¶29

Age: 34 Years, Occ. : Business,

¶30

R/o.: At post Lamangaon, Tq. Kannad,

Dist. Aurangabad.

Mobile:- 9673555072

PAN:- BVHPP6487M.

APPEARANCES For the Applicant Mr. Agarwal K D - Advocate For Defendants Ex-parte

¶35

J U D G M E N T Delivered on (08.01.2026)

¶36

The Applicant Bank has filed the present application for recovery of the sum of Rs. 29,98,014.00 (Rs. Twenty-Nine Lakhs, Ninety-Eight Thousand and Fourteen Only) together with contractual rate of interest on Credit Loan facility from 04.08.2023 till the full realization of the entire dues and costs from the Defendants.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 3 of 9

[Ambadas]

Brief facts of the application are as under:

¶41

That the Defendants approached the Applicant Bank and requested for the sanction of a Credit Loan Facility. Upon considering the Defendant’s representation, request and financial needs, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the First loan Facility of Rs.27,56,890/- for Purchase of Vehicle Ashok Leyland Diesel vehicle Model No. 3118 Super BSIV vide sanction letter dated 25.10.2019. Second Loan Facility of Rs. 2,40,000/- for Vehicle Body on 29.10.2019. Third Loan Facility for Topup Loan for working capital Term Loan of Rs. 5,89,273/- on 08.09.2020 on certain terms & conditions.

¶42

The agreed rate of Fixed interest for the Vehicle loan facility was @10.10% p.a., Vehicle Body Loan facility was @10.16% p.a. and Term Loan facility was @9.25% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶43

In order to secure the aforesaid Credit Loan 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.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 4 of 9

[Ambadas]

The applicant bank contended that to secure the Credit Loan facility, the Defendants have executed Unattested Deed of Hypothecation dated 15.10.2019 and Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 15.10.2019 of the following property/hypothecation in favour of the applicant bank:

¶48

Description of Hypothecated Assets:-

¶49

Ashok Leyland Diesel Vehicle Model No. 3118 Super BSIV is registered with the Registering Authority With Registration

¶50

bearing No. MH-20-EL-7151 an Endorsement of

¶51

Hypothecation in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶52

The applicant Bank further contended that the Defendants Failed to keep their promises and commitments agreed by them with regard to the 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 conditions of the sanction letter. Thereafter the applicant bank

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 5 of 9

[Ambadas]

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 29.09.2022. Therefore, the applicant Bank issued legal notice to the Defendants through their Advocate on 11.04.2023. Despite service of Notice, the Defendants failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues of the applicant Bank. Hence, this application is filed.

¶57

The Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 have been served through Bank Officer. Despite Service, the defendants did not appeared and filed WS. Hence, they were proceeded ex-parte vide Order dated 05.02.2025.

¶58

The applicant Bank has filed Claim Affidavit Exhibit-4 of Mr. Shantanu Shailesh Naik, Officer of the applicant bank and has produced on record the original loan transaction documents as per Exh. AW-1/1 to AW-1/16 along-with List of documents Exh.5 which corroborates the case of the applicant Bank.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 6 of 9

[Ambadas]

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

¶63

Since the Defendants failed to filed 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.

¶64

The Applicant Bank has claimed future interest at @10.10%, @10.16% and @9.25% p.a. with monthly rests on loans from 04.08.2023 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.

¶65

Hence, I pass the following order.

¶66

ORDER

¶67

(A) Original Application No. 631/2024 is allowed with costs.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 7 of 9

[Ambadas]

(B) The Defendants shall pay Jointly and Severally to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs. 29,98,014.00 (Rs. TwentyNine Lakhs, Ninety-Eight Thousand and Fourteen Only) along-with future interest at @9% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the Original Application, i.e., 17.05.2024, till full payment/ realization of the said amount.

¶72

(C) The aforesaid adjudicated amount is secured by Hypothecation Agreement in favour of the Applicant Bank vide document Exh.AW-1/5 to Exh. AW-1/8, in list of Documents Exh.5.

¶73

Description of Hypothecation :-

¶74

Ashok Leyland Diesel Vehicle Model No. 3118 Super BSIV is registered with the Registering Authority With Registration Bearing No. MH-20-EL-7151 an

¶75

Endorsement Of Hypothecation in favour of the Applicant Bank.

(OA No.631-2024)

Page 8 of 9

[Ambadas]

(D) The applicant Bank is entitled to sell the hypothecated

¶80

Vehicles/ articles/goods etc., to recover its dues.

¶81

(E) Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶82

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

¶83

(G) File be consigned to the record room.

¶84

Sd/-

¶85

(Dr. J. R. Chauhan) Place : Aurangabad Presiding Officer Date : 08.01.2026 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶86

(OA No.631-2024)

¶87

Page 9 of 9

¶88

[Ambadas]

Icici Bank Limited v. Bapu Sukhdeo Pawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Bapu Sukhdeo Pawar

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

Union Bank of India versus Mr. Baban Shivdas Nagrale

State Bank of India versus Mr. Sandip Bhimrao Awasarmol

Maharastra Gramin Bank versus M/s Dnyanai Agro Processing Centre

Hdfc Bank versus Vitthal Prabhakar Bade

Hdfc Bank versus Rasul Gulab Shaikh

Union Bank of India versus Rajendra Trymbak Patil