Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 1 :- Judgement
MHCC010020202020
Presented on : 15-02-2020
Registered on : 30-11-2021
Decided on : 19.06.2024
Duration : YY: MM: DD
04: 04 : 04
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON, BOMBAY
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 1316 Of 2021
Exhibit-18
Canara Bank,
A Body of corporate Constituted under the
Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of
Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its Head Office
at: - 112, J. C. Road, Bangalore, Karnataka
State.
And having one of their branch offices at 10,
Homji Street Branch, Fort, Mumbai 400023.
Through Sharanpreet Singh Officer, Age:30
Years. ... Plaintiff.
V/s.
M/s. Shaman Tours and Travels
A Proprietary concerned, through its Proprietor
Mr. Shaman Janardhan Malyankar, aged 40
Years, Indian inhabitant, at Room No.50, 2nd
Floor, 56-P, Umar Mansion, Sane Guruji Marg,
Jacob Circle, Saatrasta, Mumbai-400 011. ... Defendant.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. VIRENDRA. D. KEDAR
(COURT ROOM NO.14)
DATE : 19th DAY OF JUNE 2024
-: Appearances: -
Ld. Adv. Sujata Dahigaonkar for plaintiff.
Defendant Ex-parte.
-- 1 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 2 :- Judgement
JUDGMENT
The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of
sum of Rs.3,68,373.93/- together with interest @ 10.75 % per annum
with monthly rests from the date of filling of the suit till its full
realization.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are as under: -
The plaintiff is a Nationalise Bank, a body corporate, constituted
and functioning under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer
of Undertaking) Act, 1970.
3. It is submitted that, upon the request of the defendant, the
plaintiff granted Term Loan Facility of Rs.5,90,000/- on 1st March 2016
with interest @10.75% per annum compounded monthly for purchase
of vehicle being Hyundai Xcent CRDI for commercial purpose. The said
loan facility was repayable in 84 months installments of Rs.10,262.34
each.
4. So as to availed said loan facility, the defendant had executed
several documents. Thereafter, on availing the loan facilities, the
defendant was irregular in making the payment of loan amount.
Despites numerous reminders, letters and phone call, the defendant
failed to regularize the account, as a result of which the account of
defendant treated as Non-Performing Asset on 28.01.2019. After the
account classified as NPA, the defendant failed to repay the entire loan
outstanding. Thereafter, the plaintiff had issued recall notice through its
advocate on 01.03.2019 to the defendant, thereby calling upon him to
make the payment of due amount within 15 days from the date of
receipt of notice.
-- 2 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 3 :- Judgement
5. It is submitted that, the defendant made last payment on
28.09.2018 ans as such the suit is well within limitation. The plaintiff
file Pre-Institution Mediation Application on 19.08.2019, but the
defendant failed to appear. Hence, the Secretary DLSA, Mumbai has
issued Non-Starter Report dated 27.01.2020. Hence, the suit for
recovery of above said amount.
6. In spite of service, the defendant failed to appear hence, suit
proceed Ex-parte against the defendant
vide order dated 15.12.2023.
7. In support of its claim, the plaintiff has examined PW-1
Sharanpreet Singh at Exh.5. The plaintiff got proved documents
through this witness filed along-with list Exh.6. The plaintiff has filed
Evidence Closing Pursis at Exh.17.
8. Heard the learned Advocate for the plaintiff. Perused the record.
9. Following points arise for my determination, to which I have
given my findings with reasons as follows: -
Sr.
No.
Points Findings
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for
recovery of sum of Rs.3,68,373.93/
together with interest @ 10.75 %
per annum with monthly rests from
the date of filling of the suit till its
full realization, as claimed?
Yes.
2. What Order and Decree? As per final order.
-- 3 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 4 :- Judgement
REASONS
As to point no.1:
10. The plaintiff has examined PW-1 Sharanpreet Singh. He deposed
as per the contents of the plaint averments. Hence, I do not want to
reproduce the same to avoid the repetitions. The plaintiff has filed copy
of Authority Letter along-with the affidavit of Examination-in-Chief,
thereby he be authorised to depose on behalf of the plaintiff’s bank.
The testimony of witness is remained unchallenged.
11. The defendant had obtained Term Loan Facility of Rs.5,90,000/-
from the plaintiff’s bank for purchasing four-wheeler for commercial
purpose. At that time, the defendant has executed certain documents
such as; Loan application (Exh.07); Letter of Sanction (Exh.08); Loan
Agreement (Exh.09); Receipt (Exh.10); Particulars of assets and
liabilities (Exh.11); Letter of authority to debit monthly installments
(Exh.12). The defendant had paid last installments on 28.09.2018 and
thereafter, failed to clear the outstanding dues. Therefore, the plaintiff
has issued Recall Notice (Exh.13). As per the Statement of Account and
relevant certificates under Bankers Book of Evidence (Exh.14 and
Exh.15 Respectively), there is an amount of Rs.3,68,373/- is due upon
the defendant. After going through the evidence and documents relied
upon by the plaintiff, it reveals that the defendant failed to clear the
outstanding amount with the plaintiff’s bank. Thus, the plaintiff has
succeeded to prove its case for recovery of amount.
12. It is further to be seen that, the plaintiff issued Pre-Institution
Mediation notice in view of mandate of Section 12-A of the Commercial
Courts Act on 19.08.2019. In spite of notice, the defendant failed to
appear before Mediation Centre. Thus, the Secretary DLSA Mumbai has
-- 4 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 5 :- Judgement
issued non-starter report dated 27.01.2020. Hence, the period during
which the parties remained occupied with the pre-institution mediation;
such period shall not be computed for the purpose for limitation under
the Limitation Act. Even otherwise, the suit is well within limitation.
13. Now in view of my above discussion and considering the
pleadings and evidence adduced by the plaintiff, the plaintiff's bank
duly proved that, the defendant is liable to pay due amount of
Rs.3,68,373.93/- along-with interest @ 10.75% per annum from the
institution of suit till its full realization. Hence, my answer to point no.1
is in affirmative.
AS To POINT NO.2.
14. In view of my above discussions, I pass the following order;
ORDER
1. Commercial Suit No.1316 of 2021 is decreed with Costs.
2. The defendant does pay an amount of Rs.3,68,373.93/- together
with interest @ 10.75% per annum from the date of filing of suit till its
full realization.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
4. Commercial Suit No.1316 of 2021 disposed of accordingly.
(Virendra D. Kedar)
District & Addl. Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date:.19.06.2024 Mazgaon, Gr. Mumbai
(C.R. No.14)
Dictated on : 19.06.2024
Transcribed on : 19.06.2024
Signed on : 19.06.2024
-- 5 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.1316/2021 -: 6 :- Judgement
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE: 19.06.2024 NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
TIME: 05.00 p.m. Mr. Ashok Sudhakar Patil
Name of the Judge (With Court
room no.)
HHJ Shri Virendra D.Kedar
(Court Room No.14)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
19.06.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
19.06.2024
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 19.06.2024
-- 6 of 6 --