Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: MHCC010035862020 Presented on 16-07-2020
Registered on 22-10-2021
Decided on 29-11-2023
Duration 03Y: 04M: 13D
Exhibit 06
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT
AT BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 905 OF 2021
Swati Sahebrao Gadge ]
Age 40 yrs. of Mumbai, an adult Indian ]
inhabitant, having her address at ]
Room No.1, Plot No.198, Tulja Bhawani ]
Society, Shivneri Nagar, Shingre Wadi, Bail ]
Bazar, Kurla (West), Mumbai-400 070 through ]
Her C.A. Priya Dhuri Age 26 years. ]...Plaintiff
V/s.
Ranjana Mansukh Naiya ]
age not known of Mumbai, an adult Indian ]
inhabitant working for gain with Municipal ]
Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Conservancy ]
Department, “K” West Section, Tata Compound ]
S.V. Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 058 ]
Worker No.04459914 Residing at Juhu Galli ]
Ram Temple, Slum Harijan Vas, ]
Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 058. ]...Defendant
Appearance :
Ld. Advocate Mr. Ramesh Jain for the plaintiff.
Defendant absent (Ex-parte).
-- 1 of 6 --
2 Sum Suit No.905/2021
CORAM : HHJ SHRI K. P. SHRIKHANDE
C. R. NO. : 61
DATE : 06/11/2023.
J U D G M E N T
(Pronouncement and delivered in the open court)
1. This is the suit filed under Rule 2 of Order XXXVII of Code
of Civil procedure, 1908 (CPC) for recovery of Rs.1,53,704.10. Brief
facts of plaintiff’s case may be summarized as under:
2. The plaintiff does the business of money lending. On
22-04-2017, the defendant executed a Demand Promissory Note in
favour of plaintiff for valuable consideration of Rs.1,00,000/- received
from the plaintiff. The defendant promised to repay the said sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest thereon at the rate of 18% p.a. on
demand.
3. According to the plaintiff, from time to time she demanded
the said amount from the defendant, but the defendant failed and
neglected to pay the said amount and therefore, he issued a demand
notice dated 15-02-2020, and called upon her to pay the amount. But
inspite of receipt of notice, the defendant failed and neglected to pay
the amount. Hence, the present suit. The plaintiff prayed for the
decree for amount of Rs.1,53,704.10 and interest at the rate of Rs.18%
p.a. on the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the date of filing
the suit till its full realization.
4. The defendant was served with the writ of the suit
summons. The plaintiff has filed affidavit of service at Exh.2. Despite
the service of the suit summons, the defendant has not caused her
appearance and therefore, the suit proceeded ex-parte against her by
the order dated 01-04-2023.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 Sum Suit No.905/2021
5. In support of claim, the plaintiff filed affidavit of claim of
her Constituted Attorney Priya Dhuri at Exh.03 and reiterated the
contention for recovery of Rs.1,53,704.10 along with the further
interest at the rate of Rs.18% p.a. The plaintiff has filed and relied
upon the following documents.
Sr. No. Particulars
1 Promissory Note dated 22-04-2017
2 Plaintiff’s Advocates letter dated 15-02-2020
3 Money Lender Licence
4 Forms under Bombay Money Lending Act
5 Books of Accounts
6 Copy of General P.O.A. dated 26-07-2019
6. To decide the present suit, following points arose for
consideration to which my findings are recorded against each of them
for the reasons given below:
Sr.
No.
Points Findings
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to
recover amount of Rs.1,53,704.10
from defendant?
If yes, at what rate of interest?
Yes.
Entitled to interest @ Rs. 9%
p.a. on Rs.1,00,000/- from
16-07-2020 the date of filing
of suit till its full realization.
2. What order and decree? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
As to points No.1 & 2:
7. The plaintiff has filed claim affidavit of her Constituted
Attorney Priya Dhuri at Exh.03 in support of her contentions of receipt
of promissory note for consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. Her oral
testimony is supported by the original promissory note dated
-- 3 of 6 --
4 Sum Suit No.905/2021
22-04-2017. The plaintiff enjoys presumption under Section 118(a) of
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which supports the contention of the
plaintiff that the demand promissory note was executed for the
valuable consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is appearing that the
plaintiff is a money lender and she has money lending licence, and she
lent the money Rs.1,00,000/- on the interest at the rate of Rs.18% p.a.
The Demand Promissory Note placed on record clearly supports this
case of the plaintiff.
8. The defendant has not appeared in the matter inspite of
the service of writ of summons, which gives an inference that the
defendant has nothing to contest and she does not dispute the claim of
the plaintiff. In view of Rule 2 (3) of order XXXVII of CPC, owing to
failure of defendant to cause appearance, it needs to be presumed that
the defendant admits the allegations contained in the plaint. The
Promissory Note is of dated 22-04-2017 for the amount of
Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, I hold that the plaintiff is entitled to recover
the principal amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on the strength of promissory
note.
9. It may be seen that the plaintiff has applied the interest
Rs. 53,704.10 at the rate of Rs.18% p.a. from 22-04-2017 till filing of
the suit. In view of provision of Section 79 of Negotiable Instruments
Act, when the suit is based on promissory note, the plaintiff can be held
entitled to the interest at the agreed rate of interest i.e. @ Rs.18% p.a.
from the date execution of the said promissory note till filing the suit.
Hence, I hold that the plaintiff is entitled to interest amount of
Rs.53,704.10. Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the total amount
of Rs.1,53,704.10 and it is rounded to Rs.1,53,704/-.
10. The defendant had agreed to pay the interest at the rate
-- 4 of 6 --
5 Sum Suit No.905/2021
of Rs.18% p.a. on the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, I am of the
view that the plaintiff can be made entitled to the further interest on
the said amount from the date of filing the suit. The plaintiff has
prayed for the further interest at the rate of Rs.18% p.a. However, I am
of the view that the same is excessive as compared to the rate of
interest of Nationalized Banks. Therefore, having regard to the
provision of section 34 of the CPC, I am of the view that granting the
interest at the rate of Rs.9% p.a. on the principal amount would be just,
proper and reasonable. Hence, I hold that the plaintiff is entitled to
further interest at the rate of Rs.9% p.a. on the principal amount, from
the date of filing the suit till its full realization and hence, I answer
point No.1 accordingly. In the result, in answer to point No.2, I
proceed to pass following order.
O R D E R
1) Summary Suit No.905 of 2021 is hereby decreed with the costs.
2) The defendant shall pay an amount of Rs.1,53,704/- (Rupees
One Lakh, Fifty Three Thousands, Seven Hundreds and Four
only) to the plaintiff.
3) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff simple interest on
Rs.1,00,000/- at the rate of Rs.9% p.a. from 16-07-2020, the
date of filing of suit till its full realization.
4) The plaintiff is entitled to get refund 2/3rd of the court-fees paid
by her.
5) The decree be drawn up accordingly.
( K. P. Shrikhande )
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Date: 29-11-2023 Court Room No.61
Mumbai.
Dictated on : 29-11-2023
Corrected and signed on:29-11-2023
-- 5 of 6 --
6 Sum Suit No.905/2021
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
30-11-2023 at 12.45 p.m. Mrs. V. V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Shri K. P. Shrikhande
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
29-11-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 29-11-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 30-11-2023
-- 6 of 6 --