Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Suba Singh and Another

DRT31 Jul 2026OA/694/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act by ICICI Bank Ltd. against two respondents for recovery of a loan amount of Rs. 20,41,119.00, declaring the defendants jointly and severally liable and granting simple interest at 8% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 20,41,119.00 plus costs and simple interest at 8% p.a. from respondents, recoverable via sale of mortgaged/personal assets.

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

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH CAMP COURT AT DISTRICT TARN TARAN, PUNJAB

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 694/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 29.05.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 31.07.2026

¶6

ICICI Bank Ltd., a Body Corporate incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having its Registered Office near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara, Gujarat- 390007 and its Corporate Office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400051 and having Branches all over India and one of its Branch Offices situated at SCO no. 132-134, Sector 9C, Chandigarh through its Authorized Signatory, Sh. Jatinder Mishra

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sh. Suba Singh, S/o Sh. Sabeg Singh, R/o House no. 329, Village Rajoke, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab- 143415

¶10

Smt. Kashmir Kaur, W/o Sh. Suba Singh, R/o House no. 329, Village Rajoke, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab- 143415

¶11

……….Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Ashutosh Bajpai, Advocate proxy for Sh. Manav Singal, Advocate for applicant (through VC)

¶14

None for defendants (already ex-parte vide order dated 09.06.2026)

¶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. 20,41,119.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty One Thousand One Hundred Nineteen Only). The Original Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory o f the applicant, who is competent to institute

¶17

2 OA NO. 694/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SUBA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶18

the Original Application vide Power of Attorney dated 08.01.2025, which is Annexure A1 to this OA.

¶19

The brief facts of the OA are that defendant no. 1 approached the applicant for grant of KCC Limit of Rs. 22.00 Lacs vide Credit Facility Application Form, dated 17.08.2017, which is Annexure A2 to this OA.

¶20

The applicant sanctioned KCC Limit of Rs. 13.50 Lacs vide Sanction Letter dated 07.09.2018, which is Annexure A3 to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor.

¶21

Defendants mortgaged their immovable property i.e. Land measuring 60K 00M situated at Village Rajo Ke 1, Hadbast no. 64, Patti, Tarn Taran, Punjab vide Declaration u/s 4 (1) of the Punjab Agricultural Credit Operations and Miscellaneous Provisions (Banks) Act, 1978 and Letter, which are Annexure A5 and A6 to this OA.

¶22

Documents executed: Hypothecation Deed dated 21.09.2017, which is Annexure A4 to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated 31.12.2022 along with postal receipts, which is Annexure A7 to this OA and Statement of Account, which is Annexure A8 to this OA.

¶23

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. 20,41,119.00, which is recoverable and the defendants were served recall notice 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 summons to appear before this Tribunal but no one appeared on behalf of defendants and they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 09.06.2026. 7. In support of the OA, affidavit of Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Authorized Signatory, ICICI Bank Limited h as been filed. 8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.

¶24

3 OA NO. 694/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SUBA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶25

It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant, who appeared through Video Conferencing that in view of the documentary evidence brought on record which had gone unrebutted, the applicant had proved its case.

¶26

From the perusal of all the Annexure A1 to A8 to this OA, it is proved that the defendant no. 1 approached applicant for availing of the loan facility which was granted to him. Defendant no. 2 stood as guarantor. Defendants 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. 20,41,119.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty One Thousand One Hundred Nineteen Only), along with interest from the defendants, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount.

¶27

In so far as pendente lite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant in clause 5. para iii. has claimed interest @11.50% p.a. with yearly rests w.e.f. 31.10.2024 till the realization.

¶28

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 hypothecated assets/mortgaged properties, 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 simple interest @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.

¶29

4 OA NO. 694/2025 ICICI BANK LIMITED VS. SUBA SINGH AND ANOTHER

¶30

In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendants are liable to pay to the applicant a sum of Rs.20,41,119.00 (Rupees Twenty Lacs Forty One Thousand One Hundred Nineteen 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 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.

¶31

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶32

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶33

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 17.08.2026.

¶34

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.

¶35

Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal at Camp Court District Tarn Taran, Punjab . Dated: 31.07.2026

¶36

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

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Suba Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Sh. Suba 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

Ms Sandeep Traders versus Uco Bank

Mamta Tiwari versus Uttarakhand Garmin bank

Shri Sheshnath Pandey versus Indian Bank (Allahabad Bank)

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Hardev Singh and Another

Punjab National Bank versus Sh. Balbir Singh through His Legal Heir

Axis Bank Ltd. versus Sh. Harmanjit Singh and Another