Final Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SHEETAL CHAUDHARY PRADHAN:
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-RENT CONTROLLER
NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS
NEW DELHI
CS No. 1317/21
State Bank of India,
A Corporation constituted
Under the State Bank of India Act, 1995,
having its registered and head Office at State Bank Bhavan,
Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-440024
one of its Local Head Office at 11, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001 and one of its branch at
Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, New Delhi and also recovery branch
known as RACPC 11, Parliament Street New Delhi-110001,
through its Deputy Manager Ms. Ruchika Arora.
.......... Plaintiff
VERSUS
Chandan Singh
S/o Sh. Balram Singh
R/o H.No. 424/4, gali no.4,
Near Balaji Mandir, Laxmi Vihar, Burari, Delhi-110084.
Also at
C/o M/s Siddharth Tours
9th Floor, Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan,
Janpath, New Delhi-110001
M-9911827299
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
(On Suit for Recovery of Rs.1,59,132/-)
Date of institution : 23.11.2021.
Date for reserving for judgment : 24.09.2022.
Date of judgment : 30.09.2022.
Final judgment : Suit decreed
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 1 of 6
-- 1 of 6 --
1. By way of this order I shall decide the suit filed by the
plaintiff for recovery money due against defendant on loan account.
2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff bank is a legal
entity and the present suit has been filed in the court by the plaintiff
bank through its authorized person, who is posted as Deputy Manager
at RACPC, 11, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001. It is the case of
the plaintiff that the defendant had approached the plaintiff bank at its
Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, New Delhi branch for grant of financial
assistance by way of auto/car loan facility. It is averred that considering
the proposal and economic viability, on 27.6.2016 the plaintiff bank
had sanctioned and disbursed car loan amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the
defendant which he has duly availed of by purchasing Honda Amaze
car bearing Registration No. DL1ZA 4362. It is stated that to avail the
loan facility granted, defendant had executed various loan documents
viz.:
1. Car loan application form.
2. Arrangement letter dt. 27.6.2016
3. Loan cum Hypothecation Agreement dt. 27.06.2016
4. Vehicle delivery letter dt. 27.06.2016
5. Annexure-1
6. Annexure-VIII
It is further stated that defendant had agreed to pay interest on
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 2 of 6
-- 2 of 6 --
the outstanding loan amount 9.75%p.a. with monthly rest subject to rise
and fall time to time as per banking guidelines. The said loan was
repayable by the defendant in 60 monthly installments (EMIs) of
Rs.10,562/- with interest in terms of agreement till entire loan
outstanding in liquidated. It is further stated that the term loan account
bearing no. 35866512197 at the aforesaid branch was opened in the
name of defendant wherein the sanctioned amount was disbursed to
him. It is further stated that defendant duly availed the said facility
sanctioned by the plaintiff bank. It is alleged by the plaintiff bank that
the defendant has failed to adhere to financial discipline and defaulted
in making the payment of EMIs as per schedule. It is further mentioned
that the plaintiff classified the loan account of the defendant as NPA on
27.12.2019. It is stated that the defendant has executed and signed
letter dt. 24.06.2020 in favour of plaintiff bank. It is further stated that
plaintiff bank has taken possession of hypothecated vehicle Honda
Amaze bearing registration no. DL1ZA4362 car on 24.06.2020 for
Rs.86,500/- and sold out the same after adopting due process. It is
further stated that the plaintiff bank credited the sale proceeds amount
to the account of defendant on 14.09.2020 and for balance amount the
plaintiff bank has filed the present suit. It is further stated that despite
service of legal notice dated 14.09.2021, defendant failed to comply the
same. However, defendant wrote letter dt. 24.06.2020 for return of
hypothecated car if outstanding amount is not paid by the defendant. It
is further submits that after crediting sale proceeds to account of the
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 3 of 6
-- 3 of 6 --
defendant the Books of account reflect a debit balance of Rs.1,59,132/
which the defendant liable to pay to the plaintiff bank.
With these facts, the plaintiff bank filed present suit in the
court against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,59,132/-
along with pendente lie and future interest @ 8.25% per annum.
3. Prima facie, suit is sufficiently stamped, is within
limitation and within the territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction of this
court, Plaint was filed in duplicate and is signed and verified.
4. Summons were issued to the defendant, defendant did not
appear in the court despite service. He was proceeded ex-parte on
16.07.2022.
5. Matter was fixed for Ex-parte evidence of plaintiff. They
examined Sh. Anil Kumar Arora, Authorized Representative of the
plaintiff company as PW-1, who tendered his evidence by way of
affidavit Ex. PW-1/1 and mainly relied upon the following documents:-
i. True copy of Gaztt. Notification of SBI dated 27.03.1987 as
Ex.PW1/1.
ii. Photocopy of RC of hypothecated vehicle Mark-A.
iii. Copy of insurance of the vehicle Mark-B.
iv. Copy of aadhar card of defendant Mark-C.
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 4 of 6
-- 4 of 6 --
v. Copy of PAN Card of defendant Mark-D.
vi. Proforma invoice of vehicle Ex. PW-1/2.
vi. Car loan application Ex. PW-1/3.
vii. Arrangement letter dated 27.06.2016 Ex. PW-1/4.
viii. Loan cum Hypothecation agreement dated 27.06.2016
Ex. PW-1/5.
ix. Vehicle delivery letter dated 27.06.2016 Ex. PW-1/6.
x. Annexure – I undertaking Ex.PW-1/7.
xi. Annexure – declaration Ex. PW-1/8.
xii. Letter dated 24.06.2020 written by defendant Ex. PW-1/9.
xiii. Certificate of sale dated 14.09.2020 Ex. PW-1/10.
xiv. Copy of legal notice Ex. PW-1/11.
xv. Postal receipt Ex. PW-1/12 (Colly).
xvi. Account statement Ex. PW-1/13.
xvii. Certificate of accrued interest Ex. PW-1/14.
xviii. Certificate under Section 65 B Indian Evidence Act Ex.
PW-1/15.
xix. Seizure memo Ex. PW-1/16.
6. Ex parte evidence was closed and final arguments were
lead by the counsel for plaintiff. I have heard them at length and have
perused the record carefully.
7. Evidence in present case remain un rebutted and un
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 5 of 6
-- 5 of 6 --
challenged. This court has no reason to disbelieve the testimony of the
AR of the plaintiff. Testimony is supported by documentary evidence.
Plaintiff has prove its case on scale of preponderance of probabilities,
against the Defendant.
8. Relief.
In view of the discussions above, the present suit is
decreed in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendant. The
plaintiff bank is entitled for the decreetal amount of Rs.159,132/- along
with interest @ 8.25% per annum on the same from the date of filing of
the present suit till the date of decree.
Costs of the suit are also awarded to the plaintiff bank.
Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly after filing of
deficient court fees, if any.
File be consigned to record room as per rules.
[SHEETAL CHAUDHARY PRADHAN]
Announced in the open court SCJ-CUM-RC
on 30.09.2022 New Delhi Distt, PHC, Delhi
CS no.1317/21 State Bank of India Vs. Chandan Singh Page 6 of 6
-- 6 of 6 --