Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Satnam Singh and Another

DRT19 Mar 2026OA/677/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed ICICI Bank's original application for recovery of Rs.22,04,517.28 from two borrowers who defaulted on a Kisan Credit Card loan mortgaged by land. The court awarded 8% simple interest and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.22,04,517.28 with 8% simple interest; issuance of Recovery Certificate; liberty to enforce through land sale or attachment of personal assets.

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Satnam Singh and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.677/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 21.05.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 19.03.2026

¶6

ICICI BANK LTD, Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and a Banking Company within the meaning of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, and is having its Registered Office at Land Mark, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390007 and interalia having branch at SCF-1, Grain Market, Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur, Punjab-148026, also having Regional office at SCO 132-133-134, Sector 9-C, Chandigarh-160017, through its Manager and authorized signatory Sh. Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Satnam Singh S/o Sh. Veer Singh, R/o H. No. 122, Village Nakta, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur (Pb)-148026.

¶10

Sh. Harwinder Singh S/o Sh. Satnam Singh, R/o H. No. 122, Village Nakta, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur (Pb)-148026.

¶11

…….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Himendra Pal Singh, Advocate for the applicant.

¶14

Defendants already ex-parte vide order dated 23.01.2026.

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

Present Original Application was instituted by the applicant under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendants for recovery of Rs.22,04,517.28 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Four Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Twenty Eight only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra , Authorized Representative o f 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.

¶17

2 OA/677/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SATNAM SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

The brief facts of the OA are that the defendants approached the applicant for grant of Kisan Credit Card (KCC) limit of Rs. 15.00 Lacs vide credit facility application form dated 12.05.2016, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶19

The applicant sanctioned Kisan Credit Card (KCC) limit of Rs.15,00,000/- for the 1^st year and to be enhanced to Rs.21,96,000/for the 5^th year, vide sanction letter dated 30.05.2016, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants.

¶20

Defendant no.1 mortgaged his immovable property i.e. land measuring 38Bigha-08Biswa situated at Village Nakta, Hadbast No. 33, Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur, Punjab vide Declaration dated 30.05.2016 under Section 4(1) of Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978, which is Annexure A5 to this OA; Letter dated 30.05.2016 to Sub Registrar for creation of charge, which is Annexure A6 to this OA.

¶21

Documents executed : Deed of Hypothecation dated 30.5.2016, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Notice dated 12.08.2024 along with postal receipts, which are Annexures A7 & A8 to this OA and Statement of Account with certificate, which is Annexure A9 to this OA.

¶22

The loan account became irregular and was classified as NPA and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan account there was a debit of Rs.22,04,517.28, 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 23.01.2026.

¶23

3 OA/677/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SATNAM SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶24

In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Mishra , Authorized Representative, ICICI BANK LIMITED, h as been filed.

¶25

Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record. 9. It was argued by learned counsel that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case. From the perusal of all the Annexures A1 to A9 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, account of the defendants was classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.22,04,517.28 (Rupees Twenty Two Lacs Four Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Twenty Eight only) along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the account.

¶26

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in relief clause has claimed interest @12.00%p.a. with 2% penal interest and monthly rests from 30.03.2025 till the realization.

¶27

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

¶28

¶29

OA/677/2025

¶30

ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SATNAM SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶31

@08.00%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.

¶32

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.22,04,517.28 (Rupees. Twenty Two Lacs Four Thousand Five Hundred Seventeen and Paise Twenty Eight only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @08.00%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 mortgaged 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.

¶33

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶34

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶35

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

¶36

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.

¶37

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶38

Dated: 19.03.2026

¶39

(MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH) Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chandigarh

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Satnam Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Satnam 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

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Phuman Singh and Another

Yes Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Gurpiar Singh and another