Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. Vishal Kansal and Ors.

DRT5 Sept 2026TA/485/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an Original Application filed by ICICI Bank Limited against three respondents. The Tribunal validated the bank's claim for outstanding dues and directed payment of principal, costs, and future interest at 12% per annum, with enforcement via sale of mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay Rs.41,88,502/- plus future interest at 12% p.a. within 30 days; recovery certificate issued; non-payment allows execution against mortgaged flat and other properties.

Icici Bank Limited versus Vishal Kansal and Ors. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A No. 485 of 2023

¶2

Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi 4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi

¶3

Presiding Officer: Shri Govind Ballabh Sharma

¶4

T.A. No. 485 of 2023

¶5

ICICI Bank Limited 2nd Floor, Videocon Towers Block El, Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi-110055 Applicant Versus 1. Sh.Vishal Kansal s/o Sushil Kumar Kansal R/o House No.277/1, 2nd Street Shakti Nagar Village Chengal Pattu, Chennai-60002 2. Smt.Preeti Kansal w/o Sh.Vishal Kansal R/o House No.277/1, 2nd Street Shakti Nagar Village Chengal Pattu, Chennai-60002 Both also at: Flat No.1103, 11th Floor, Tower-2 Pinnacle `ID" Dreams, Nipania Village Pipliya Kumar, Indore-452001 3. M/s JSA Devcons Private Limited Corporate Office: A-302, CLIFTON, Raviraj Oberoi Complex, New Link Road Andheri (W), Mumbai-400058 Defendants Present: Sh.Rakesh Singh, Counsel for the applicant bank Date of Reserve: 17.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 05.09.2026

¶6

FINAL ORDER

¶7

This original application has been filed by the applicant bank on 05.06.2018 before DRT-III Delhi and the transferred

Cd-

T.A No. 485 of 2023

to DRT-I Delhi under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.41,88,502/- (Rupees Forty One lacs Eighty Eight thousand Five hundred Two only) as on 05.04.2018 together with pendentelite and future interest @24% per annum with monthly rest from the date of filing of this application till the date of realization and costs.

¶12

The brief facts of the case are that at the request of defendant no.1 and 2 vide loan application along with necessary documents, the applicant bank sanctioned and disbursed housing loan of Rs.39,48,000/- (Rupees Thirty Nine lacs Forty Eight thousand only) on 11.05.2015 @9.90% interest per annum to be repayable in 240 equated monthly installments w.e.f. .05.06.2015 for purchasing under construction Flat no. 1103, 11th Floor, Tower-2, Pinnacle "D" Dreams, Nipania, Village Pipliya Kumar, Indore which was being developed and constructed by the defendant no.3.

¶13

That in order to avail the housing loan facility, the defendants no.1 and 2 submitted loan application and executed Loan Facility Agreement along with terms and conditions dated 17.04.2015, Permission to Mortgage Letter dated 14.03.2015 and Tripartite housing, loan Agreement in favour of applicant bank and defendant no.3.

¶14

In order to secure the housing loan facility, the applicant bank created equitable mortgage of Flat no. 1103, 11th Floor, Tower-2, Pinnacle "D" Dreams, Nipania, Village Pipliya Kumar, Indore on the basis of Permission to Mortgage issued by defendant no.3.

¶15

It has been submitted that defendant no.3 vide letter dated 14.03.2015 created security interest and assured that

¶16

¶17

T.A No. 485 of 2023

¶18

lien has been marked and assure that sale deed shall be sent directly when it is registered. The defendant no.1 and 2 assured to repay the loan facility together with interest, costs etc. to the applicant bank notwithstanding to any subsequent changes in the schedule of construction of the project by defendant no.3 or any delay or deferment of project for any reason.

¶19

It has been submitted by the applicant bank that after availing the housing loan facility, the defendant no.1 and 2 failed to adhere to financial discipline contrary to the terms and conditions of agreement, continuously defaulted in repayment of dues and interest despite several requests and reminders, the defendants failed to regularize the account. The applicant bank terminated the agreement the loan facility and issued loan recall notice dated 26.06.2017 to the defendants to liquidate the outstanding of Rs.39,61,131/- plus interest but defendants failed to make the payment hence the applicant bank has approached this tribunal for recovery of its dues.

¶20

Notices of this O.A. were issued to the defendants and despite of proper service, the defendants have chosen to absent from the proceedings. As per order dated 17.08.2026, the defendants have been proceeded ex-parte as they have not appeared before the Tribunal nor written statement, evidence and affidavit of assets has been filed.

¶21

In order to prove'its case, the applicant bank has filed the original documents such as Copy of Power of Attorney of Authorized Representative of bank, Letter of Permission to Mortgage by Defendant no.3, Home Loan Facility Agreement, Loan Recall Notice dated 20.06.2017, Certificate of Bankers' Book Evidence Act, True Certified copies of Statement of Account marked as Page No.1 to 58.

¶22

¶23

T.A No. 485 of 2023

¶24

The applicant bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the O.A. Even otherwise the whole case of the applicant bank is based on the documents and the same have been duly approved.

¶25

The case filed by the applicant bank gone unrebutted and there is no question of disbelieving the case of the applicant bank has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts.

¶26

As per the provision of Section 19(20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 which is analogous to Section 34 of CPC, on filing of the suit/claim, the contract between the parties comes to an end and the Court/Tribunal has a discretion to award the same depending upon the circumstances of each case. Same principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bank of India Vs. Ravindra & Others. Taking stock of all the circumstances and keeping in view that there is a drastic fall in rates of interest globally and domestically, I am of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the interest at the rate of 12% p.a. is awarded.

¶27

In the light of the above discussions, the Original Application deserves to be allowed.

¶28

ORDER

¶29

I, allow this OA and direct the defendants to pay to the applicant bank, jointly or severally, within a period of 30 days, a sum of Rs.41,88,502/- (Rupees Forty One lacs Eighty Eight thousand Five hundred Two only) as on 05.04.2018 together with costs and future interest @12.00% per annum from 05.04.2018 till the date of realization; failing which the aforesaid

¶30

¶31

T.A No. 485 of 2023

¶32

amount shall be recovered from the sale of mortgaged Flat no. 1103, 11th Floor, Tower-2, Pinnacle "D" Dreams, Nipania, Village Pipliya Kumar, Indore. In case of shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the sale of movable and immovable properties of the defendants.

¶33

II) The recovery certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi.

¶34

III) Parties are directed to appear before the Recovery Officer, DRT I, Delhi on 04.11.2026.

¶35

IV) Copies of final order as well as Recovery Certificate be sent to all concerned free of cost.

¶36

(GOVIND BALLABH SHARMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, DELHI

¶37

(Dictated and pronounced in open court) Dated: 05.09.2026

¶38

Icici Bank Limited v. Vishal Kansal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. Vishal Kansal and Ors.

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

Canara Bank versus Sahruk Trading Co. and Anr.

Karnataka Gramin Bank versus Eranna Alias Eranna Devarmani

City Union Bank Limited versus Ms Rajdeep Tissues

State Bank of India versus M/S R R Brothers

Canara Bank versus Deeyog Metal Pvt. Ltd.

Poonam Kushwaha versus Sammaan Capital Limited