Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Nanaksar Infra and Another

DRT11 Jun 2026OA/97/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's application under Section 19 RDBA for recovery of dues. Despite defendants being absent, the Tribunal noted the imposition of NPA status and granted a reduced interest rate, ordering joint and several liability for repayment.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.16,04,312.49 jointly and severally from applicants and Rs.16,03,988.10 from defendant no. 2 with interest at 8% p.a.

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Nanaksar Infra and Another — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHANDIGARH

¶2

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 97/2025

¶3

PRESIDED OVER BY MRIDULESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

DATE OF INSTITUTION: 31.01.2025

¶5

DATE OF DECISION: 11.06.2026

¶6

ICICI Bank Limited, 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 at ICICI Bank Tower, Near Chakli Circle, Old Padra Road, Vadodara-390007 and its Corporate Office at ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400051 and having branches all over India and one of its Branch Offices, situated at SCO 132-133-134, Sector 9 C, Chandigarh-160017, through its Authorized Signatory, Sh. Jatinder Mishra.

¶7

……..Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s Nanksar Infra, through its Proprietor, Sh. Aman Sagar, 7009 Sunny Enclave, Sector 125, Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin-140301

¶10

Sh. Aman Sagar S/o Sh. Francis Masih R/o House No. 8067, 1st Floor, Near Milton Tower, Sunny Enclave, Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin-140301

¶11

.……Defendants

¶12

Advocates:

¶13

Argued by Sh. Aseem Kataria, Advocate proxy for Sh. Himender Pal Singh, Advocate for applicant

¶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.32,08,300.59 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Paise Fifty Nine Only). The Original

¶17

2 OA/ 97/2025 ICICI BANK LIMTED VS M/S NANKSAR INFRA AND ANOTHER

¶18

Application has been filed through Sh. Jatinder Mishra, Manager, of the applicant,who is competent to institute the Original Application vide
Power of Attorney dated 08.01.2025, which isAnnexure A1to this OA.
2. The brief facts of the OA are that the defendant no. 1, through its
proprietor defendant no. 2, approached the applicant for grant of
Commercial Vehicle Loan of Rs. 30.00 lacs vide Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form dated 05.10.2021, which isAnnexure A4to
this OA. Thereafter, Defendant no. 2, approached the applicant for grant of
Car Loan of Rs. 17,75,623.00 vide Preliminary Credit Facility Application Form dated 27.09.2023, which isAnnexure A9to this OA.
3. The applicant sanctioned the Commercial Vehicle Loan of Rs.
30.00 lacs vide Credit Facility Application Form dated 15.11.2021, which isAnnexure A5to this OA and the terms and conditions were duly accepted by the defendants. Thereafter, the applicant sanctioned the Car Loan of Rs.
17,75,623.00 lacs vide Credit Facility Application Form dated
27.09.2023, which isAnnexure A10to this OA. 4. Defendants hypothecated their vehicles as under:
1. Defendant no. 1, through its proprietor defendant no. 2,
hypothecated its vehicle namely Ashok Layland, bearing
Registration no. PB65BB7188, Engine no. MCHZ413694 and
Chassis no. MB1H3LHD0MRCR8095; vide Hypothecation Deed dated 15.11.2021, which isAnnexure A6to this OA; Form of Particulars of vehicle, which isAnnexure A8to this OA.
2. Defendant no. 2 hypothecated his vehicle namely Mahindra
Scorpio N, bearing Registration no. PB27J7788, Engine no.
YGP4J62973 and Chassis no. MA1TJ2YGTP6J87327; vide
Hypothecation Deed dated 27.09.2023, which isAnnexure A11 to this OA; Form of Particulars of vehicle, which isAnnexure A12 to this OA.
Documents executed: GST Certificate dated 03.08.2021, which is Annexure A2to this OA; Sole Proprietorship Declaration Letter, which

¶19

3 OA/ 97/2025 ICICI BANK LIMTED VS M/S NANKSAR INFRA AND ANOTHER

¶20

isAnnexure A3to this OA; Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated
15.11.2021, which isAnnexure A7to this OA; Loan Recall Notice dated
17.12.2024, which isAnnexure A13to this OA; Statement of Accounts (LVCHD00044783360) dated 19.12.2024, which isAnnexure A14to
this OA; Statement of Accounts (LAZM000048848030) dated
19.12.2024, which isAnnexure A15to this OA; Certificate regarding
the Computer System and the genuineness of the Statement of Account being prepared through Computer System, which isAnnexure A16to
this OA.
5. The loan accounts became irregular and were classified as NPA
and after adjusting debit and credit entries in loan accounts, there was a debit of Rs.32,08,300.59 (Rupees Thirty Two Lacs Eight Thousand
Three Hundred and Paise Fifty Nine Only), 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 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, Manager,
ICICI Bank Limited,has been filed.
8. Heard ex-parte arguments and perused record.
9. It was argued by learned proxy counsel for applicant 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 theAnnexures A1 to A16to this OA, it
is proved that the defendant no. 1, through its proprietor defendant no.
2, approached the applicant for availing a Commercial Vehicle Loan.
Thereafter, defendant no. 2, approached the applicant for availing a Car
Loan. Both the loans were granted to them. Defendants had executed
all the relevant documents in favour of the applicant. The defendants
failed to pay back the loans as per terms and conditions of the

¶21

4 OA/ 97/2025 ICICI BANK LIMTED VS M/S NANKSAR INFRA AND ANOTHER

¶22

agreement between the parties. Subsequently, both the accounts of the defendants were classified as NPA. From the documentary evidence brought on record, it is proved that applicant is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.16,03,988.10 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Three Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Ten Only), along with interest from the defendant no. 2 and Rs.16,04,312.49 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Four Thousand Three Hundred Twelve and Paise Forty Nine Only), along with interest from the defendant nos. 1 & 2, jointly and severally, from the date of filing of the present Original Application till realization of the amount. 10. In so far as pendent elite and future rate of interest is concerned, the applicant has claimed interest @24.00% p.a. with monthly rests from 19.12.2024 till the realization. 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 vehicles, undertaking of the defendants, quantum of loans 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 @8.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts from the date of filing of the OA till realization of the amount ordered vide this final order. It is ordered accordingly. 11. In the result, the application is allowed declaring that the defendant no. 2 is liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.16,03,988.10 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Three Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Eight and Paise Ten Only) and defendant nos. 1 & 2 are liable to pay to the applicant a total sum of Rs.16,04,312.49 (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Four Thousand Three Hundred Twelve and Paise Forty Nine Only), jointly and severally, with costs, current and future simple interest @8.00% p.a. in both the loan accounts 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 of Rs.16,04,312.49 from the sale of hypothecated vehicle of the defendant nos. 1 & 2 and

¶23

¶24

OA/ 97/2025

¶25

ICICI BANK LIMTED VS M/S NANKSAR INFRA AND ANOTHER

¶26

Rs.16,03,988.10 from the sale of hypothecated vehicle of the defendant no. 2 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.

¶27

12. Any other application pending stands disposed of.

¶28

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶29

Parties to appear before Learned Recovery Officer of this Tribunal on 25.06.2026

¶30

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. Pronounced by me in the open Tribunal .

¶31

Dated: 11.06.2026

¶32

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

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Nanaksar Infra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M/S Nanaksar Infra 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

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Aadhya Fashion and Another

Punjab Gramin Bank versus Sh. Sukhdeep Singh and Another

State Bank of India versus Sh. Jaspreet Singh

Hdfc Bank Limited versus M/s Aalam Enterprises and Others

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Sh. Pankaj Kumar

Canara Bank versus M/S K S Ispat Udyog and Another