Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Deepak Sharma

DRT22 Jan 2026OA/83/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-I Chandigarh issued summons to defendant in OA/83/2026 filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of Rs. 28.82 lakhs. It appointed an authorized officer as receiver to take possession of hypothecated vehicle and directed defendant to show cause and disclose assets.

What did the court decide?

Summons issued; Authorized officer appointed receiver to take possession of vehicle if not paid by date of custody.

Icici Bank Limited versus Deepak Sharma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ITEM NO. 10

¶3

OA/83/2026 ICICI BANK LIMITED Vs DEEPAK SHARMA

¶4

22.01.2026

¶5

Present: Sh. Rahul Garg Advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶6

This is fresh OA under Section 19 of The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, filed by the applicant bank against the defendant seeking recovery certificate for a sum of Rs. 28,82,783/- alongwith interest and other dues.

¶7

I have heard Ld. counsel who appeared through video conferencing and perused record.

¶8

Let summons under Section 19(4) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 be issued alongwith copy of the OA and copy of this order be sent by way of registered post as well as by hand (dasti) and through Electronic mode on the e-mail address(s) of the defendants as well as through WhatsApp numbers, if they are available with the Applicant.

¶9

Defendant is directed to show cause within 30 days from the service upon defendant as to why relief prayed for should not be granted. Defendant is further directed to disclose particulars of the property or assets other than properties and assets specified by the applicant under Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-Section (3-A) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993.

¶10

Applicant is directed to collect summons and ensure service upon the defendant and file proof of service.

¶11

The vehicle mentioned in the OA as stated hereinafter have been hypothecated with the bank as argued by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant and thus for this hardly any permission of this Tribunal is required.

¶12

Ld. Counsel for applicant referred the case ICICI Bank Ltd. Versus Kaptan Singh 139 (2007) DLT 501 passed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in this regard.

¶13

In light of the case law referred and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorized officer of the bank is appointed receiver to take over the possession of the vehicle and to keep the same under his custody.

¶14

Sr.	Vehicle	Engine	Chassis No.	Regn. No.
No.		No.
1.	TOYOTA	IGDA8297	MBJAA3GS300619999~	CH0ICV8243
	FORTUNER	85	0824

¶15

In case any police aid will be required it will be permissible for the said authorized officer to seek such aid in order to enable him to take possession of the said vehicle. The said authorized officer on obtaining possession of the vehicle will issue appropriate receipts to the person from whose custody vehicle is taken and will also note down therein, the condition of vehicle and will ensure that vehicle is kept in the same condition.

¶16

In case the defendant pay all the installments due on the date of taking the custody of vehicle, the vehicle shall not be taken by the authorized officer of the bank. In case the vehicle is to be attached or taken into custody then it should be without any goods.

¶17

Defendant may file WS within 30 days from the date of receipt of summons with an advance copy to the applicant. Thereafter applicant shall be at liberty to file replication, if any within 15 days thereafter.

¶18

Copy of this order be supplied to all concerned by hand (dasti).

¶19

List before Registrar for filing service report, completion of pleadings and report on admission and denial of documents on 02.03.2026.

¶20

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

Icici Bank Limited v. Deepak Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Deepak Sharma

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

State Bank of India versus Sh. Boota Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Smt. Ranjit Kaur And Another

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Sh. Jatinder Pal and Others

S K Brothers versus Punjab National Bank and Others

Messrs Vast Casting Private Limited versus Bank of India

State Bank of India versus Manpreet Kaur