Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010011502020
Presented on : 28.01.2020
Registered on : 17.02.2020
Decided on : 22.08.2022
Duration : 2 Y, 6 M, 25 D
EXHIBIT05
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 211 OF 2020
Mr. Mohammed Khan Gulam
Mohidin
of Fort Mumbai an adult, Indian
inhabitant of Mumbai aged 49 Years,
Occ. Carrying on business of Money
Lending at Room No.03, First Floor,
Mazda House, 34 Calicut Street, S.B.S.
Road, Fort, Mumbai400 001.
...Plaintiff
Versus
Mr. Ravindra Kashiram Shinde
Of Mumbai, an adult Indian
Inhabitant aged about 38 Years,
occupationservice, having his
residence address at Jivan Shanti
Colony, E1/20, S.V. Road, Santacruz
West, Mumbai 400 054. And also
having his office address at L.I.C. of
India, Yogakshema Building, Jivan
Bhima Marg, 05th Floor, Personnel
Department, Mumbai400 021.
...Defendant
-- 1 of 6 --
2
Appearance :
Ld. Advocate Mr. Balbheem Patil for plaintiff.
None for defendant (Exparte).
CORAM : HHJ DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR
C. R. NO. : 61
DATE : 22/08/2022
Judgment
This is the suit for recovery of an principal amount of
Rs.50,000/ along with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum
till its realization.
PLAINTIFF’S CASE
2. Plaintiff is a licensed Money Lender. He had lent sum of
Rs.50,000/ to the defendant on 20/04/2018 in cash with an interest at
the rate of 18% p.a. Defendant had issued demand promissory note in
favour of the plaintiff on the same day. Plaintiff demanded repayment
of the said amount but defendant neglected and failed to pay the same.
Therefore, plaintiff issued demand notice through his advocate on
11/04/2019. The said notice was sent on the last known address of the
defendant. However, same returned unserved for the reason ‘refused’.
As the defendant did not pay the amount due under the promissory
note, plaintiff has filed the present suit.
3. Defendant was duly served with writ of summons on
24.02.2021. However, he did not appear before this Court and as such
suit proceeded exparte against him.
4. In support of claim, plaintiff filed his affidavit of claim at
Exhibit3 and reiterated his claim of recovery of Rs.50,000/ along with
interest at the rate of 18% p.a. Plaintiff has filed and relied upon
-- 2 of 6 --
3
following documents.
Sr.
No.
Exhibit
No. Particulars
1 Exh.4/1 Demand promissory note of Rs.50,000/
dtd.20/04/2018.
2 Exh.4/2 Photo copy of Form No.10 dated 20.04.2018.
2 Exh.4/3
colly.
Notice of demand dated 11th April 2019 issued by the
plaintiff and copy of the postal receipt and unserved
envelope.
3 Exh.4/4 Photo copy of Money Lending License from 01.04.2019
to 31.03.2020.
5 Exh.4/5 Photo copy of cash book and ledger book maintained by
the plaintiff for relevant period.
5. So as to decide the present suit following points arise for my
consideration. I have recorded my findings along with reasons on the
said point as under :
Sr.
No.
Points/Issues Findings
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to
recover principal amount of
Rs.50,000/ from defendant?
If yes, at what rate interest?
Plaintiff is entitled to
recover an amount of
Rs. 50,000/ from the
defendant along with
interest @ 9% p.a. from
date of filing of the suit
till realization.
2. What order and decree? Suit is decreed as per
final order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1
6. This being a suit for recovery of an amount, it is imperative to
-- 3 of 6 --
4
examine whether the plaintiff has placed on record the requisite
evidence to prove its entitlement.
7. Plaintiff has filed his claim affidavit in support of his
contentions of receipt of promissory note for consideration of
Rs.50,000/. His oral testimony is supported by the original promissory
note dated 20.04.2018. Plaintiff enjoys presumption under Section
118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which supports the
contention of plaintiff that the present promissory note was issued for
the valuable consideration of Rs.50,000/.
8. As noted above, plaintiff has filed demand promissory note
dated 20.04.2018 which reveals that the plaintiff has lend money of
Rs.50,000/ to the defendant on interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The
said demand note bears signature of defendant along with his thumb
impression with endorsement ‘received in cash’. The address
mentioned on the demand note and the address mentioned in the
recovery notice placed on record by the plaintiff at Exhibit4/3 is the
same. The summons in the present matter was duly served on the same
address. The notice was sent on his home address as well as his office
address. Thus, fact of lending amount as claimed by the plaintiff in this
claim affidavit is supported by the documents placed on record. As
there is no contra evidence on record, the said fact goes unchallenged.
Hence, I hold that the plaintiff had lent amount of Rs.50,000/ as
claimed by him.
9. The defendant has not appeared in the matter in spite of the
receipt of summons from this Court. Which gives an inference that
defendant has nothing to contest and he do not dispute the claim of the
plaintiff. Hence, I hold an amount of Rs.50,000/ is due and payable to
the plaintiff from the defendant. Hence, I answer point no.1 in
-- 4 of 6 --
5
affirmative.
10. So far as claim of interest is concerned, plaintiff has claimed
interest at the rate of 18 % p.a. Same is excessive as compared to rate of
interest of nationalized banks. Therefore, I find it just and proper to
grant interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till
its realization.
AS TO POINT NO.2.
11. From the findings recorded to the point No.1, it is clear that
plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.50,000/ from the
defendant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Hence, in
answer to point No. 2, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1) Summary Suit No. 211 of 2020 is hereby partly decreed with
costs.
2) Defendant do pay an amount of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) to the plaintiff along with interest at the rate
of 09 percent per annum from the date of filing of suit till its
realization.
3) Court fees be refunded as per rules.
4) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
Date 22/08/2022. (Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Court Room No.61
-- 5 of 6 --
6
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF TYPIST
22/08/2022 Ms. Harshada Hanumant Sawant
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Dr. S.D. Tawshikar
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
22/08/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 22/08/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 22/08/2022
-- 6 of 6 --