ICICI BANK LIMITED vs JAYARAJ M.S on 31 October 2025

1. Jayaraj M.S.,

1339/9, Nannankuzhi,

Balaramapuram,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695 509.

2. Valsala T.K.,

1339/9, Nannankuzhi,

Balaramapuram,

Thiruvananthapuram – 695 509. ...Defendants

This Original Application having been heard on 29.10.2025 in the presence of Advocates M/s.Lal K.Joseph and Akash George for the applicant bank and the defendants being exparte and stood over to this day for consideration, the Tribunal delivered the following:

F I N A L O R D E R

This Original Application has been filed under S.19(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.49,77,411.70 due under housing loan account together with future interest thereon @16.25% per annum with monthly rests from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property. Facts of the case:

2. The applicant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its corporate office at Mumbai and zonal office at M.G.Road, Ernakulam.

3. Pursuant to the application submitted by the defendants, applicant bank sanctioned a home loan of Rs.14,63,700/- as per sanction letter dated 31.03.2006. As security for the loan, the defendants executed a loan agreement agreeing to repay the loan in 180 equated monthly installments. Towards collateral security, the defendants created equitable mortgage over ‘A’ schedule property by deposit of title deeds with the applicant bank and executed a declaration to that effect on 03.04.2006. After availing the loan, the defendants were irregular in repayment and the account was declared as NPA. Hence the applicant issued a lawyer notice to the defendants on 21.04.2015 calling upon them to repay the outstanding dues but they did not clear the liability. In such premises, the applicant was constrained to file the OA claiming the following reliefs:

(i) To recover a sum of Rs.49,77,411.70 together with pendente lite and post-decree interest thereon from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property;

(ii) To recover the costs, charges and expenses from the defendants;

(iii) To issue Recovery Certificate to the Recovery Officer with a direction to recover the amount and pay it to the applicant bank.

4. The defendants were duly served with summons by way of substituted service by effecting publication of summons in Malayala Manorama and The New Indian Express dailies dated 13.03.2024. But the defendants neither appeared nor were they represented and hence they were declared exparte on 28.10.2024.

Proof Affidavit:

5. In order to establish the claim on behalf of the applicant bank, one Mr.Jowin Jose Thayil, Debt Manager of the applicant has filed proof affidavit and produced the loan documents marked as Exhibits A1 to A21. The proof affidavit filed by AW1 and the documents produced in this case are not challenged by the defendants. The availing of the home loan and creation of mortgage over the schedule property are well established from the documents placed by the applicant bank. A sum of Rs.49,77,411.70 is outstanding in the loan account as on 11.03.2015, which is established from the account statements marked as Exts.A19 and A20.

6. Pending the OA, the Tribunal had granted an ad- interim injunction vide order dated 02.06.2015 in IA No.1300/2015 restraining the 1st defendant from alienating or encumbering the OA schedule property until further orders. The said order has been made absolute on 29.10.2025.

7. It could be discernible from Ext.A19 account statement that the loan account became irregular since 2006. Instead of taking legal steps for recovery of dues, applicant bank waited till 26.05.2015 to file the OA. Resultantly, the loan amount of Rs.14,63,700/- availed on 31.03.2006 got inflated to Rs.49,77,411.70 as on 11.03.2015 due to accrual of huge amount as interest. It could be seen that component of interest in the amount found due under Ext.A19 account relating to the home loan account has become disproportionate to the principal amount advanced by the applicant bank.

8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment reported in (2002) 1 SCC 367 in the case titled Central Bank of India v. Ravindra had held as follows: “(8) Award of interest pendent lite and post-decree is discretionary with the court as it is essentially governed by Section 34 CPC dehors the contract between the parties. In a given case if the court finds that in the principal sum adjudged on the date of the suit the component of interest is disproportionate with the component of the principal sum actually advanced the court may exercise its discretion in awarding interest pendente lite and post-decree interest at a lower rate or may even decline awarding such interest. The discretion shall be exercised fairly, judiciously and for reasons and not in an arbitrary or fanciful manner.” In view of the ratio decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court and having regard to the amount advanced and interest applied and the fact that the applicant bank unnecessarily delayed the initiation of recovery measures thereby causing huge amount to accrue as interest, this Tribunal is of the view that applicant is entitled to get pendente lite and post-decree interest @6% per annum, which this Tribunal considers reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

9. The applicant bank, therefore, is entitled to get a final order on the following lines: In the result, the applicant bank is given a final order allowing it to recover:

(i) the sum of Rs.49,77,411.70 (Rupees forty nine lakhs seventy seven thousand four hundred and eleven and Paise seventy only) due under the home loan account from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property;

(ii) Pendente lite and post-decree interest @6% per annum on the sum of Rs.49,77,411.70 (Rupees forty nine lakhs seventy seven thousand four hundred and eleven and Paise seventy only) from 26.05.2015 till realization from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property; and

(iii) also costs and expenses borne by it for realization of the loan from the defendants.

10. The schedule to the OA shall be appended to this final order.

11. The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

12. Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

13. Communicate copy of this order to both parties as provided in R.16 r/w R.2(c) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to my PA, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Tribunal on this the 31st day of October, 2025)

[SOVAN KUMAR DASH] PRESIDING OFFICER

A P P E N D I X Witness for Applicant: AW1: Sri.Jowin Jose Thayil, Debt Manager of the applicant bank. Witness for Defendant(s): Nil

Applicant’s Exhibits

Ext.No Date Particulars of documents

A1 16.03.2006 Home loan application submitted by the defendants. A2 31.03.2006 Sanction letter issued by the applicant bank sanctioning home loan of Rs.14,63,700/- to the defendants. A3 03.04.2006 Home loan agreement executed by the defendants. A4 03.04.2006 Terms and conditions applicable to the loan executed by the defendants. A5 15.02.1992 Settlement deed No.379/1992. A6 03.04.2006 Declaration executed by the defendants. A7 … Partition deed No.3962/1123. A8 19.01.2001 Release deed No.192/2001 of Venganoor SRO. A9 30.12.2005 Tax receipt issued by Kottukal Village Office. A10 18.03.2006 Possession certificate issued by Village Officer, Kottukal. A11 … Location certificate issued by Village Officer, Kottukal. A12 … Location sketch prepared by Village Officer, Kottukal. A13 06.01.2006 Building tax receipt issued by Secretary, Balaramapuram Grama Panchayath. A14 21.02.2005 Encumbrance certificate issued by Venganoor SRO.

A15 07.04.2006 Encumbrance certificate issued by Venganoor SRO. A16 21.04.2015 Copy of lawyer notice issued to the defendants. A17 … Returned postal cover addressed to the 1st defendant. A18 … Returned postal cover addressed to the 2nd defendant. A19 … Certified copy of the statement of account relating to the home loan. A20 … Statement showing the total amount due under Ext.A19 account. A21 19.05.2015 Statement showing the rate of interest applied in Ext.A19 account from time to time.

Defendants’ Exhibits – Nil

PRESIDING OFFICER

PRESIDING OFFICER

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

Dated the 31st October, 2025

TA No.213/2017 (OA No.229/2015)

Between

ICICI Bank Ltd., Zonal Office, Emgee Square Building, M.G.Road, Kochi – 682 035.

…Applicant

And

Jayaraj M.S., 1339/9, Nannankuzhi, Balaramapuram, Thiruvananthapuram & another.

...Defendants

F I N A L O R D E R