Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1 Comm. Suit No.45/2021
MHCC010031402020 Presented on : 12/03/2020
Registered on : 15/02/2021
Decided on : 16/02/2023
Duration : 02Y/00M/1D
Exh.26
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
(Court Room No.32)
COMMERCIAL SUIT No.45 of 2021
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
Karnataka State and having one of their
Branch office at 10, Homji Street Branch
Fort, Mumbai400 023.
…PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
M/s. Sidhivinayak Tours and Travels
A proprietary concern, through its
Proprietor, Mr. Sudhir Dhanaji Maskar aged
27 years, Indian Inhabitant, At Room No.5,
1st floor, Chikhal House, Princess Street,
Shamaldas Gandhi Marg, 453/C, Kalbadevi
Road, Mumbai400 002.
...DEFENDANT
Smt. Sujata Dahigaonkar i/b. Sandhya Nanavare, learned
Advocates for plaintiff.
None preset for defendant.
CORAM : JUDGE SHRI. N.P. TRIBHUWAN
E XP A R T E J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 16/02/2023)
This is a suit for recovery of sum of Rs.8,50,338/ with
interest @ 11.50 % p.a. from the date of suit till realization of amount.
2] Plaintiff is nationalized bank, a body corporate constituted
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Comm. Suit No.45/2021
and functioning under the provisions of the Banking Companies
(Acquisition and Transfers of Undertakings) Act, 1970. Plaintiff – bank
was formerly known as Syndicate Bank, which amalgamated to Canara
Bank on 4/3/2020. Defendant approached the plaintiff and applied for
term loan of Rs.7,10,000/ for purchasing vehicle. On 27/01/2016
plaintiff has sanctioned term loan of Rs.7,10,000/ with interest @
10.95 % p.a. to the defendant. The said loan was repayable in 84 equal
monthly installment of Rs.12,554/ each. At the time of sanctioning
loan plaintiff has executed documents in favour of plaintiff i.e. loan
application, composite hypothecation agreement dtd.2/2/2016, receipt
dtd. 2/2/2016, particulars of assets and liability, authority letter to
debit monthly installments.
3] Defendant was irregular in repayment of loan installments.
Hence, account of defendant was treated as NonPerforming Assets on
31/10/2016. Despite repeated demands he failed to regularize the
account. Hence, plaintiff has issued demand notice to defendant on
12/12/2018 but defendant failed to pay the outstanding dues. As per
statement of account as on 10/3/2020 defendant was in outstanding of
loan of Rs.8,50,338/ together with interest @ 11.50% p.a. with
monthly rest. Thus, defendant is liable to pay outstanding sum of
Rs.8,50,338/ together with interest @ 11.50% p.a. with monthly rests.
Hence, this suit.
4] Defendant served with suit summons as per service
affidavit Exh.11 and 12 but defendant did not appear. Hence, suit
proceeded exparte against him.
5] On above facts following points arise for determination and
this court and recorded findings thereon for the reasons stated as under.
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Comm. Suit No.45/2021
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether the plaintiff proved that it has
advanced term loan of Rs.7,10,000/ to
defendant ?
…Yes
2. Whether the plaintiff proved that
defendant is in outstanding dues of
Rs.8,50,338/?
…Yes
3. Whether plaintiff is entitled for relief
claimed?
...Yes.
4. What order and decree? ...As per final
order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT Nos.1 to 3 :
6] Heard learned counsel of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has examined
its Manager (PW1 Vinay K. Vaidhya) to prove its case. He reproduced
all content of plaint in his chiefexamination. His evidence is supported
by documentary evidence (Exh.15 to 22) : Loan application dt.
22/01/2016, Sanction letter dt. 27/01/2016, Composite hypothecation
agreement dt. 02/02/2016, Receipts dt. 02/02/2016, Particulars of
assets and liabilities dt. 25/01/2016, Authority letter to debit monthly
installments dt. 02/02/2016, Legal notice dt. 12/12/2018, Statement
of account.
7] In view of evidence of PW1 Manager of plaintiffBank and
documentary evidence, it becomes clear that on the request of
defendant on 27/01/2016 plaintiff has sanctioned him term loan of
Rs.7,10,000/ for purchasing vehicle for commercial purpose. At the
time of sanctioning the said loan defendant has executed Hypothecation
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Comm. Suit No.45/2021
agreement and above documents in favour of plaintiff. Statement of
account and particulars of claim (Exh.22 & 23) shows that as on
10/3/2020 defendant was in outstanding principal sum of
Rs.3,14,003/ + interest of Rs.2,80,712/ + Penal interest Rs.59,887/
+ other charges Rs.1,95,735/ (Total Rs.8,50,338/).
8] Evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged. His evidence is
supported by documentary evidence mentioned in para supra. There is
no reason to disbelieve his testimony. Hence, plaintiff succeed to prove
that it has advanced above mentioned term loan to defendant with
conditions. The principal sum of Rs.3,14,003/ + interest of
Rs.2,80,712/ + Penal interest Rs.59,887/ + other charges
Rs.1,95,735/ (Total Rs.8,50,338/) is due and payable by defendant
with interest @ 11.50% p.a. with monthly rests. Therefore, plaintiff is
entitled for the recovery of the same. Hence, I answered point Nos.1 to
3 as above. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. The defendant is directed to pay to plaintiff the amount
of Rs.8,50,338/ and interest @ 11.50% p.a. monthly
rests on principal sum of Rs.3,14,003/ from the date of
suit till realization of the said amount.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
Date : 16/2/2023.
(N.P. Tribhuwan)
Judge, City Civil Court,
Mumbai. C.R.No.32
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Comm. Suit No.45/2021
Dictated on : 16/02/2023
Checked on : 16/02/2023
Signed on : 16/02/2023
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
16/02/2023 Mrs.Rupali S. Bhor
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge(with CR No.) HHJ SHRI. N. P. TRIBHUVAN
(C.R.No.32)
Date of pronouncement of Order 16/02/2023
Order signed by P.O. on 16/02/2023
Order uploaded on 16/02/2023
-- 5 of 5 --