Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment 1 SUM.SUIT 197/19
Received on : 04012019
Registered on : 04012019
Decided on : 04072019
Duration : 0Y 06M 02D
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 197 of 2019
CNR NO.: MHCC010001652019
SHERWALI NADAR KHAN Age 39 yrs.,
of Mumbai an adult Indian Inhabitant
having his address at Room No.9,
Ground Floor,6266. Husseni Building,
2nd floor, Peer Khan Street,
Nagpada, Mumbai Central Mumbai400 008. ...Plaintiff
Versus
SUBHASH T. TAWADE Age not known
Of Mumbai, an adult Indian Inhabitant,
working for gain with Godrej & Boyce
MFG.CO.LTD. Plant No.13, Metal Forming
Vikhroli East, Mumbai400 079,
And Residing at X76/9, Godrej
Colony Station Side Vikhroli East,
Mumbai400 079 ….Defendants
Appearances:
Advocate Mr.Ramesh Jain for the Plaintiff.
Defendants Exparte.
-- 1 of 5 --
Judgment 2 SUM.SUIT 197/19
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI.M.S.LONE
(C.R.NO.28)
DATED : 4TH JULY 2019
J U D G M E N T
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.73,280/(Rupees Seventy
Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty only).
2. The plaintiff case in nut shell is that on 20/06/2018 defendant
executed a demand promissory note in favour of plaintiff for valuable
consideration of Rs. 70,000/. Plaintiff demanded the said amount from
defendant but defendant refused to pay . Defendant is in default of
amount of Rs.73,280/(Rupees Seventy Three Thousand Two Hundred
and Eighty only). Hence, this suit.
3. The defendant was served with summons for appearance but he
remained absent therefore, suit is proceeded exparte against him.
4. From the material on record following points arise for my
determination and my findings with reasons are as follows:
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the plaintiff proves
that defendant has executed
demand promissory note for
valuable consideration of
Rs.70,000/?
Yes
2. Whether the plaintiff proves
that amount of Rs.73,280/
(Rupees Seventy Three Thousand
Two Hundred and Eighty only) is
due and recoverable from
defendant?
Yes
-- 2 of 5 --
Judgment 3 SUM.SUIT 197/19
3. Whether the plaintiff is
entitled for recovery of
Rs.73,280/(Rupees Seventy Three
Thousand Two Hundred and
Eighty only)along with interest as
claimed?
Yes
4.What order and decree? As per final order
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS.1 TO 4.
5. Since all points are interlinked they are discussed together. To
prove its case plaintiff examined Naim Khan, Constituted Attorney ,
vide Exh.7 and filed original promissory note, advocate notice, money
lender licence and book of accounts.
6. Heard Ld.counsel for plaintiff.
7. The oral evidence has gone unchallenged. The promissory note,
advocate notice, money lender licence and book of accounts shows that
on 20/06/2018 defendant executed a demand promissory note in
favour of plaintiff for valuable consideration of Rs. 70,000/. Plaintiff
demanded the said amount from defendant but defendant refused to
pay . Defendant is in default of amount of Rs.73,280/(Rupees Seventy
Three Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty only). As far as rate of
interest is concerned the plaintiff has claimed interest @ 18% p.a. As
per section 80 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1882 such rate of interest
can be granted. Therefore, point Nos.1 to 3 is answered as Yes and
-- 3 of 5 --
Judgment 4 SUM.SUIT 197/19
following order is passed.
ORDER
1. Suit is exparte decreed with costs.
2. Defendant pay amount of Rs.73,280/(Rupees Seventy Three
Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty only)with interest @ 18% p.a.
from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization.
3. Court fee be refunded as per rules.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(M.S.LONE)
Judge,
Date: 04/07/2019 City Civil Court,Gr. Bombay
Dictated on : 04/07/2019
Transcribed on : 05/07/2019
Signed on : 05/07/2019
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
10/07/2019 at 11.30p.m. Mrs.J.V.Pawar
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ Shri.M.S.Lone
(C.R.NO.28)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
04/07/2019
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 05/07/2019
Judgment/Order uploaded on 10/07/2019
-- 4 of 5 --
Judgment 5 SUM.SUIT 197/19
-- 5 of 5 --