Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Comm.Suit No. 466/2020. 1 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.19).
MHCC010022102020
Presented on : 20-02-2020
Registered on : 07-11-2020
Decided on : 11-03-2022
Duration : 2 years, 0 months, 20 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 466 OF 2020
Exh.19.
(Syndicate) Canara Bank, a body corporate )
Constituted and functioning under the )
Banking Companies (Acquisition and )
Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, )
having its Head office at (Manipal), 112, )
J.C.Road, Bangalore, Karnataka State and )
having one of their Branch office at )
10, Homji Street Branch Fort, Mumbai – 400 023 )...Plaintiffs
Versus
M/s. Jaanvi Tours and Travels )
A Proprietary Concern, through its )
Proprietor: Mr. Akash Subhash Baid )
Aged 29 yrs, Indian Inhabitant, )
At Room No: 13, Behind BDD Chawl No: 5 )
BJ Devrukhar Marg, Dadar, Mumbai – 14 )...Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI R.R.BHAGWAT.
(COURT ROOM NO.31).
DATE : 11th MARCH, 2022.
Ms. Sujata Dahigaonkar, Advocate for the plaintiffs.
Defendant – (Exparte).
-- 1 of 5 --
Comm.Suit No. 466/2020. 2 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.19).
JUDGMENT (EXPARTE)
1. This is suit for recovery of money.
2. Case of the plaintiff, in brief, is as under :
The plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under
the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
1970, having its branch office at 10, Homjji Street Branch, Fort,
Mumbai. Constituted Attorney Vandana Nadkarni filed the suit for the
plaintiff bank. Basically, the suit is filed by Constituted Attorney of
Syndicate Bank. Subsequently, Syndicate Bank is amalgamated with
Canara Bank and therefore, amendment is carried out in the plaint as
per order in draft notice of motion passed in roznama dated
08/03/2021. Defendant is a proprietary concern represented by
proprietor Akash Baid. On an application dated 21/01/2016 of the
defendant, the plaintiff had sanctioned term loan of Rs.7,60,000/ to
the defendant for purchasing Maruti Ertiga VXI CNG for commercial
purposes. Accordingly, sanction letter was issued on 25/01/2016. The
defendant also executed other documents including Deed of
Hypothecation of the vehicle. Though the loan amount was to be
repaid with monthly installments of Rs.13,339.24 within period of 84
months with interest at the rate of 10.95% p.a., the defendant
committed breach in repayment of the loan amount. Account of the
defendant turned NPA on 02/05/2017. Then, legal notice was issued
on 14/08/2018 calling upon the defendant to pay outstanding amount,
but the defendant failed to make payment. Hence, the plaintiff filed the
suit for recovery of outstanding amount of Rs.8,60,248.88 with further
interest at the rate of 11.50% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of
filing of the suit till the date of realization with costs of the suit.
-- 2 of 5 --
Comm.Suit No. 466/2020. 3 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.19).
3. The defendant is duly served with writ of summons as per
affidavit of service (Exh.4), but he failed to appear and oppose the
claim of the plaintiff. Therefore, I passed the exparte order against him
on 20/12/2021.
4. PW 1 Vinay Vaidhya, Officer of the plaintiff bank deposed
on evidence affidavit (Exh.5) and proved documents filed with list of
documents (Exh.6). Proved documents are at Exh.7 to 17. The plaintiff
closed evidence vide pursis (Exh.18). Heard learned counsel Miss
Sujata Dahigaonkar for the plaintiff.
5. After considering pleadings of the plaintiff and evidence on
record, following points arose for my determination with my findings
against them with reasons to follow :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Does the plaintiff prove that he is
entitled to recover amount of
Rs.8,60,248.88 from the defendant ? If
yes, at what rate of interest ? In the Affirmative.
@ 10.95% p.a. with
monthly rest.
2. What order as to costs ? As per final order.
3. What order and decree ? Suit is partly
decreed.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS.1 AND 2 :
6. PW 1 Vinay Vaidhya has specifically stated that the loan
amount enumerated in the plaint was sanctioned for purchasing the
-- 3 of 5 --
Comm.Suit No. 466/2020. 4 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.19).
vehicle to the defendant. The said vehicle is also hypothecated as per
Exh.9. The defendant failed to make payment. The defendant
neglected to make payment of outstanding loan amount as stated in
statement of account (Exh.16). In short, claim of the plaintiff is proved
from oral as well as documentary evidence on record.
7. So far as interest rate is concerned, the plaintiff has claimed
interest at the rate of 11.50% p.a., but interest rate mentioned in
sanction letter (Exh.8) is 10.95% p.a. Hence, agreed interest rate of
10.95% p.a. will prevail. Costs of the suit is liable to be imposed on the
defendant. In the light of above discussion, I record my finding as to
point no.1 in the affirmative. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Commercial Suit No. 466/2020 is partly decreed.
2. The defendant is directed to pay amount of Rs.8,60,248.88
(Rupees Eight Lakhs Sixty Thousand Two Hundred Forty
eight and Paise Eightyeight Only) to the plaintiff with
interest @ 10.95% p.a. with monthly rest from the date of
the suit till the date of realization within three months from
the date of decree.
3. The defendant shall bear the costs of the suit.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(R.R.BHAGWAT)
Judge, City Civil Court,
(Court Room No.31)
Date : 11/03/2022. Mumbai.
1. Dictated online on : 11/03/2022.
2. Signed on : 11/03/2022.
3. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
-- 4 of 5 --
Comm.Suit No. 466/2020. 5 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.19).
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
11/03/2022. 5.09 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri R.R.Bhagwat.
(Court Room No.31).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 11/03/2022.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 11/03/2022.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 11/03/2022.
-- 5 of 5 --