ICICI BANK LIMITED vs MR. G. PRAKASH & ANR. on 28 November 2025

: - O R D E R - :

1. This Original application is filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and originally numbered as OA.333 of 2012 and got transferred this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1172 of 2017. This application is filed seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.20,00,879/- (Rupees twenty lakh eight hundred and seventy-nine only) due in Housing Loan availed by the 1st and 2nd defendants.

2. It is the case of the applicant that the defendants 1 and 2 the defendant approached the applicant bank for a Housing loan of Rs.13,04,940/- (Rupees thirteen lakh four thousand nine hundred and forty only) for the purchase of scheduled mentioned flat and undivided interest in the immovable property.

3. It is also stated that the applicant had disbursed the amount as the defendants had executed the agreement, binding themselves to repay the amount with variable interest in 427 equal monthly installments of Rs. 9,788/-. It is further the case of the applicant that the second defendant was the co-borrower, and that the defendants had created an equitable mortgage by depositing the document produced as Annexure-C.

4. It is further case of the applicant that, despite availing the facility agreeing to pay back the amount, the defendants committed defaults and neglected to pay the amount despite being cold upon to do so, forcing the applicant to file the TA.

5. The 1st and 2nd defendants entered appearance and filed their written statement, contending inter alia that the TA has been filed by putting forward false, frivolous, and vexatious contentions. It is further contended that there is suppression of material facts and that the TA has been filed in collusion with the builder. It is admitted that the defendants had approached the applicant bank for a housing loan of Rs. 17 lakhs, against which a partial release of Rs. 13,04,940/- was made. The defendants admit that the originals of the title deed are with the applicant and further contend that the bank had obtained their signatures on various printed forms and agreements. The claim made in the TA is denied, apart from a para-wise denial of the statements of fact.

6. The developer was impleaded subsequently and on 03.07.2023 the 3rd defendant was called absent and set ex parte.

7. On 20.09.2013 ExtA3 to A8 were marked as follows.

1. A3- copy of the power of attorney

2. A4- Loan application

3. A5-facility agreement

4. A6- sale deed

5. A7- statement of accounts

6. A8- Demand notice

8. No defense evidence was adduced by the defendants.

9. Having heard the counsel for the applicant and for defendants 1 and 2, the only issue that arises for consideration is whether the applicant has succeeded in proving the TA claim?

10. The evidence of the applicant remains unrebutted there is no serious dispute as to the facts stated in the TA. The even the execution of loan documents and creation of security interest are admitted by the defendants. The undisputed documents produced by the applicant are sufficient to prove the TA claim. The claim of the applicant is well within limitation.

11. Hence on consideration of evidence and pleadings this Tribunal is of the view that the applicant had succeeded in proving the TA claim and is entitled for the relief as sought for in the TA. Taking note of the fact that the facility is a Housing Loan and had been kept pending for long, this Tribunal is of the view that the pendent lite and future interest can be allowed with flat rate, that too at 12% (Simple).

12. Hence, i) TA.1172 of 2017 stands allowed. ii) The applicant is entitled to realize altogether an amount of Rs. 20,00,879 (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Eight Hundred Seventy-Nine only) with further interest @ 12% (Simple) per annum from the defendants personally and also by proceeding against scheduled property. iii) If the sale proceed are not sufficient to clear the liability the defendants 1 and 2 personally and all the defendants jointly and severally liable for the balance amount. iv) The applicant is entailed for cost of this litigation for which cost memo to be filed in 7 days from the date receipt of this order. v) A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms. vi) Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order.

13. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to PY directly on the Computer, after its transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 28th day of November, 2025)

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

-Nil – List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER