Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Vikas Sharma

DRT5 Feb 2026OA/830/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application under Section 19 of the RDB Act to recover Rs.59,20,550/- with interest and costs. The court directed the issuance of a recovery certificate via the Recovery Officer for enforcement against the defendant's hypothecated or other property.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of Rs.59,20,550/- with interest at 10.67% per annum; directed issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Icici Bank Limited versus Vikas Sharma — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 830/2024 Date of Institution: 28.05.2024 Date of Decision: 05.02.2026 ICICI Bank Ltd. having its branches all over India and a branch at ……..Applicant Vs.

¶4

ICICI Bank Ltd. having its branches all over India and a branch at Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶5

Vikas Sharma S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Sharma R/o Village Shaloha Ghund (85), Tehsil Theog, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

¶6

……….Defendant

¶7

Advocates

¶8

Sh. JS Sehgal, Counsel for the applicant bank. Defendant- ex parte vide order dated 24.01.2025 .

¶9

OA for the Recovery of Rs.59,20,550/- with interest @10.67% per annum with monthly rests from 28.05.2024.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

ICICI Bank Ltd. has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of Rs.59,20,550/- with interest against Sh. Vikas Sharma (defendant).

¶12

Bank’s case is that on 31.07.2018, it had granted Term Loan-I of Rs.21.19 Lacs to the defendant for Vehicle purpose. To secure the Term Loan-I, Defendant had hypothecated his vehicle bearing Registration No. HP09B1289 (fully detailed in para No.5ii of the application). Again on 31.10.2018, applicant bank granted another Term Loan-II of Rs.80,02,474/- to the defendant for Vehicle purpose. To secure the Term Loan-II, Defendant had hypothecated his vehicle bearing Registration No. ORG0000236 (fully detailed in para No.5ii of the application). Both the loans were chargeable to different rates of interest. On 17.02.2024, a

¶13

¶14

sum of Rs.59,20,550/- was due from the defendant. Despite repeated requests, defendant did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.
3. On 10.06.2024, summons was sent to the defendant by registered
post, which was duly served. However, defendant did not put in
appearance. Vide order dated 24.01.2025, he was proceeded_ex parte_.
4. In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the
affidavit of Mr. Mohammad Vajid, Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-17.
5. I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered
view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of various schemes and on 17.02.2024, a sum of Rs.59,20,550/- was due.
6. Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of
Rs.59,20,550/- (Rupees Fifty Nine Lacs Twenty Thousand Five Hundred
Fifty Only) with interest @10.67% per annum with monthly rests from
28.05.2024, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of hypothecated vehicle(s) fully detailed
in para No.5ii of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendant.
7. Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.
8. Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.
9. Party is directed to appear before Recovery Officer on
13.03.2026,who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of
hypothecated vehicles as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act.
10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the party.
Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 05.02.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Icici Bank Limited v. Vikas Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Vikas Sharma

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 Mrs Satpal Kaur

Icici Bank Limited versus Nur Aliya represented by legal heir Tajkar Ali

MD Fariuddin Akhtar versus Axis Bank Limited

Narinderpal Singh versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Ms Ismail Fly Ash Bricks and Anr.

Bank of India versus Kulwant Singh