Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
Lodged on : 11.03.2020
Admitted on : 15.02.2021
Decided on : 16.03.2023
Duration : Y M D
3 0 5
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 39 OF 2021
CNR NO. : MHCC010031292020
Exh.9
Canara Bank a body corporate ]
constituted and functioning under the ]
Banking Companies (Acquisition and ]
Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 ]
having its Head Office at 112, J.C. Road, ]
Banglore, Karnatak State and having ]
one of their branch office at 10, Homji ]
Street Branch, Fort, Mumbai 400 023. ] ...Plaintiff
Versus
M/s. Mahadev Tours and Travels ]
A Proprietary concern, through its ]
Proprietor : Mr. Vikram Mahadev Bhosale ]
Aged 30 years, Indian Inhabitant, ]
At F101, 1 st floor, Om Sai Heights, ]
Near Yashwant Nagar, Fun Fiesta Road, ]
Nalasopara (W), Maharashtra – 401203. ] ...Defendant
Appearance:
Adv. Sujata Dahigaonkar for Plaintiff.
Defendant exparte.
CORAM : SHRI. A.S.SALGAR
ADHOC JUDGE, (C.R.NO.31)
DATED : 16th MARCH 2023
-- 1 of 7 --
2/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on : 16.03.2023)
The plaintiff bank has filed the present suit for the recovery
of the amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. from the defendant along with
interest at the rate of 10.35% per annum from the date of filing of the
suit till realization.
2. Brief facts of the plaintiff's case is as under:
The plaintiff is a Nationalized bank, a body corporate
constituted and functioning under the Banking Companies Act, having
its Head Office at Bangalore and one of its branch office is at Fort,
Mumbai. The defendant approached the plaintiff bank for grant of Term
Loan Facility of Rs.9,31,000/ on 13.10.2016 for the purpose of
purchase of vehicle being Honda Mobilio for commercial purpose. The
defendant has executed the documents in favour of the plaintiff bank
namely application for advances, Sanction letter, Composite
Hypothecation Agreement, Receipt, Particulars of Assets and Liabilities
and Authority Letter. The plaintiff bank transferred the said amount of
Rs. 9,31,000/ in the account of the defendant. The defendant has paid
some installment in repayment of the loan. However, the defendant was
not regular in repaying the monthly installment. The defendant failed to
regularized his account. As a result of which the account was treated as
NPA on 30.06.2018. As defendant failed and neglected to pay the due
amount, the plaintiff bank through their Advocate issued a legal notice
to the defendant on 12.12.2018 calling upon the defendant to pay the
outstanding amount with interest. As per Statement of Account, as on
08.03.2020 the defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 7,97,025.71ps.
together with interest. Hence, the plaintiff filed the present suit against
-- 2 of 7 --
3/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
the defendant and prayed that the defendant be directed to pay to the
plaintiff a sum of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. together with interest at the rate of
10.35% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the suit
till its realization.
3. The suit summons was issued to the defendant through
paper publication. The summons was published in two local
newspapers. The Writ of Summons was duly served to the defendant,
but the defendant remained absent. Hence, as per order passed on
13.01.2023, the suit proceeded exparte against the defendant.
4. In support of the pleading, the plaintiff examined its
Branch Manager namely Mr. Vinay K. Vaidhya at Exh.5. The plaintiff
filed documentary evidence along with list Exh.6. The documentary
evidence are at Exh.7/1 to 7/9. Evidence closure pursis of the plaintiff
is at Exh.8.
5. After considering the pleadings of the plaintiff and evidence
on record, following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded my finding against each of them with the reasons to follows:
POINTS FINDING
1) Whether plaintiff bank proves
that an amount of
Rs.7,97,025.71ps. is outstanding
from the defendant?
In the affirmative
2) Whether plaintiff bank is entitled
to recover an amount of
Rs.7,97,025.71ps. from the
In the affirmative.
At the rate of 10.35% per annum
on the principal amount.
-- 3 of 7 --
4/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
defendant? If yes, at what rate of
interest?
3) What order and decree? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
6. Heard Learned Advocate Sujata Dahigaonkar for the
plaintiff at length.
As to Point Nos.1 & 2
7. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant approached
to the plaintiff bank for the Term Loan Facility of Rs.9,31,000/ for the
purchase of vehicle. The defendant executed relevant documents in
favour of the plaintiff bank, but the defendant failed to repay the loan
amount. According to the plaintiff, an amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. is
due from the defendant. At the outset, it is to be noted that the suit
summons was duly served to the defendant, but the defendant failed to
appear before the Court. The non appearance of the defendant despite
service of summons inferred that the defendant admits the suit claim.
8. In support of the pleading, the plaintiff bank examined its
Branch Manager namely Mr. Vinay Vaidhya at Exh.5. This witness has
reiterated the averments made in the plaint. He deposed that the
plaintiff bank has sanctioned the loan to the defendant on the request of
the defendant for the purchase of four wheeler vehicle for commercial
purpose. He also deposed that the relevant documents were executed by
the defendant in favour of the plaintiff bank. This witness has
specifically deposed that the defendant has failed to repay the loan
-- 4 of 7 --
5/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
amount. According to this witness, an amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. is
due from the defendant. The aforesaid oral evidence of the plaintiff is
not subjected to the crossexamination. The defendant failed to take
crossexamination of the plaintiff. Therefore, the oral evidence of the
plaintiff remained unchallenged. Hence, I have no reason to disbelieve
the version of PW1.
9. The oral evidence of the plaintiff is supported by
documentary evidence. The relevant documents submitted by the
plaintiff are at Exh.7/1 to 7/9. The Statement of Account at Exh.7/8
shows that on 08.03.2020, an amount of Rs. 7,97,025.71ps. is due from
the defendant. The plaintiff bank has maintained the Statement of
Account in the usual course of banking transaction and in accordance
with the provisions of Bankers Book Evidence Act. Therefore, the
accounts are accurately maintained by the plaintiff bank. Thus, the
documentary evidence shows that an amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. is
outstanding from the defendant. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to
recover the said amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. from the defendant.
10. So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the plaintiff bank
has claimed interest at the rate of 10.35% per annum over the principal
amount. The agreed rate of interest between the parties is 10.35% per
annum. In short, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding
amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. along with interest at the rate of 10.35%
per annum. Hence, I answer point no. 1 in affirmative and point no. 2
accordingly.
-- 5 of 7 --
6/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
11. In the light of aforesaid discussion, it is concluded that the
plaintiff has established its claim. Hence, the plaintiff bank is entitled to
recover the outstanding amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. from the
defendant alongwith interest at the rate of 10.35% per anuum on the
principal amount from the date of filing of the suit till its realization.
Hence, the suit needs to be decreed. Hence, I pass the following order:
ORDER
1) Commercial Suit No. 39 of 2021 is decreed with costs.
2) The defendant do pay an amount of Rs.7,97,025.71ps. (Rs. Seven
Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Twenty Five and Seventy One
Paise Only) to the plaintiff bank along with interest at the rate of
10.35% per annum on the principal amount with monthly rests
from the date of filing of the suit till its realization within three
months from the date of this decree.
3) Defendant shall bear the cost of the suit.
4) Court fee, if any, be refunded to the plaintiff as per rule.
5) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(Judgment pronounced in the open Court)
Dated : 16.03.2023 (A.S. Salgar)
Adhoc Judge,
City Civil Court
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 16.03.2023
Transcribed on : 20.03.2023
Signed on : 20.03.2023
-- 6 of 7 --
7/6 Judgment in Com. Suit No. 39/2021
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
21.03.2023 12.30 p.m. Prachi Y. Potdar
Stenographer Grade I
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri. A.S. Salgar
(C.R.NO. 31)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
16.03.2023
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 20.03.2023
Judgment/order uploaded on 21.03.2023
-- 7 of 7 --