Final Order 12

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF GORAKH NATH PANDEY
DISTRICT JUDGE (COMMERCIAL COURT-08),
CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI.
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
CNR No.DLCT01-008475-2023
BANK OF BARODA,
BRANCH TOWN HALL
CHANDNI CHOWK,
DELHI – 110006.
.......... Plaintiff
Versus
(1) SH. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA,
S/O SH. RAMESH SAV
(2) SMT. ARCHANA GUPTA (GUARANTOR)
W/O SH. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA,
BOTH R/O 278, KATRA PERAN,
TILAK BAZAR KHARI BAOLI,
TILAK BAZAR NORTH,
CHANDNI CHOWK,
DELHI – 110006.
ALSO AT:
H.NO.93, GALI NO.6,
NEAR SHAMSHAN GHAT KAPIL VIHAR,
MUKUNDPUR NORTH, NEW DELHI – 110042.
…...... Defendants
Date of Institution : 01.07.2023
Date of final arguments : 03.12.2024
Date of decision : 03.12.2024
Decision : Decreed
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
Page 1 of 5
BANK OF BARODA VS. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
-- 1 of 5 --
J U D G M E N T:-
1. This suit has been filed by the Plaintiff Bank against the
defendants seeking recovery of Rs.4,24,114.58 alongwith pendente-
lite & future interest.
2. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant no.1 had
approached it for financial assistance by way of Car Loan. Upon
consideration of the request of the defendant, the loan amount of
Rs.5,50,000/- was sanctioned to him vide sanction letter dated
27.10.2016. Defendant no.1 had executed the requisite documents
and other related documents in favour of the plaintiff bank for the
grant of loan facility. The defendant no.2 stood guarantor for the
said loan facility. The loan amount was disbursed to the defendant
no.1 vide account no.89790600000226. After availing the loan
facility, the defendant no.1 has failed to adhere to the financial
discipline and has defaulted in timely payment of loan installments.
The plaintiff bank therefore, issued notice dated 11.10.2019 asking
the defendant no.1 to regularize the loan account but of no avail.
Again notice dated 16.01.2021 was issued to the defendant no.1 for
recovery of vehicle. On 15.07.21, the defendant no.1 surrendered
the vehicle to the plaintiff bank which was auctioned on 31.05.22
for an amount of Rs.90,600/- and amount of Rs.4,24,114.58
remained due and outstanding against the defendants pertaining to
the loan account. The present suit is accordingly filed by the
plaintiff against the defendants for the recovery of Rs.4,24,114.58
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
Page 2 of 5
BANK OF BARODA VS. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
-- 2 of 5 --
alongwith pendentelite and future interest.
3. The Defendants did not appear despite service of the
summons by way of publication in Newspaper ‘Rashtriya Sahara’
dated 07.10.2024 nor filed written statement within the stipulated
time as per Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and hence, the defendants
were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 07.10.2024 of my Ld.
Predecessor.
4. The Plaintiff examined its AR Sh. Sarthak Malakar as
PW-1 to prove the case. The witness was not cross-examined on
behalf of the Defendant. No evidence was led by the defendant.
5. I have heard Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff and have
perused the plaint, documents filed alongwith the same as well as
evidence led by the Plaintiff.
6. The brief and relevant facts for filing the present suit have
been mentioned at the outset. There is no defence on record of the
defendant. In the evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A, PW1 has
reiterated the contents of the plaint. He has also proved the following
documents:-
(1) Ex.PW1/A: Copy of Board Resolution.
(2) Ex.PW1/B (OSR): Copy of application for credit
facilities to transport operator.
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
Page 3 of 5
BANK OF BARODA VS. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
-- 3 of 5 --
(3) Ex.PW1/C (OSR): Doc 35 letter of repayment dated
27.10.2016.
(4) Ex.PW1/D (OSR): Authorization letter dated 27.10.2016.
(5) Ex.PW1/E (OSR): Statutory liability dated 27.10.16.
(6) Ex.PW1/F (OSR): Doc 53 loan agreement dated
27.10.16.
(7) Ex.PW1/G (OSR): Doc 48 letter of guarantee dated
27.10.16.
(8) Ex.PW1/H (OSR): Reminder letter dated 20.02.21.
(9) Ex.PW1/I (OSR): Letter of Sale/Transfer of vehicle
dated 21.06.22.
(10) Ex.PW1/J (Colly): Copy of legal notice issued to the
defendant and its postal receipt.
(11) Ex.PW1/K: Computer generated statement of account.
(12) Ex.PW1/L: Non Starter Report.
(13) Ex.PW1/M: Certificate under Section 65B of Indian
Evidence Act
7. PW1 was not cross-examined at all on behalf of the
Defendant. Therefore, his testimony as well as documents proved by
him have remained uncontroverted on behalf of the Defendant.
Considering the deposition of witness PW-1 as well as documents
proved by him, it is manifest that the Plaintiff Bank has proved its
case against the Defendants.
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
Page 4 of 5
BANK OF BARODA VS. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
-- 4 of 5 --
Relief:
In view of the above, the suit of the plaintiff is hereby
decreed for a sum of Rs.4,24,114.58 in favour of the Plaintiff bank
and against both the Defendants jointly and severally alongwith
pendentelite and future interest @ 9% per annum.
8. The Plaintiff shall be entitled to the costs of the suit also.
9. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly.
10. File be consigned to Record Room after necessary
compliance.
Announced in the open court (GORAKH NATH PANDEY)
on 03rd December, 2024. District Judge (Commercial Court-08)
Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
CS (COMM.) 954/2023
Page 5 of 5
BANK OF BARODA VS. VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
-- 5 of 5 --