Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010040992020
Presented on :15092020
Registered on :18122020
Decided on :06102022
Duration :02Y,0M,21D
EXHIBIT10
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 575 OF 2020
KRANTI AMOL NARKAR
aged Years, Mumbai an adult Indian
inhabitant having her address at
09/10/10, Swami Vevekanand Nagar,
Dr.E.Moses Road, Worli, Mumbai400
018.
...Plaintiff
Versus
DEEPA DILIP BHOSALE
Age and full name not known of
Mumbai an adult Indian inhabitant
Working for gain with Don Bosco
School, Sagaon, Dombivali, Thane and
residing at Tukaram Chaval No.2,
Room No.6, Dombivali West, Thane.
...Defendant
Appearance :
Ld. Advocate Mr. Ramesh Jain for plaintiff.
None for defendant (Exparte).
CORAM : DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR
C. R. NO. : 61
-- 1 of 6 --
2
DATE : 06/10/2022
Judgment
This is the suit for recovery of principal amount of
Rs.2,00,000/ along with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per
annum till its realization.
PLAINTIFF’S CASE
2. Plaintiff is a licensed Money Lender. He had lent a sum of
Rs.2,00,000/ to the defendant on 15/06/2019 in cash on an interest at
the rate of 18% p.a. Defendant had issued demand promissory note in
favour of the plaintiff on the same day. Plaintiff demanded repayment
of the said amount but defendant neglected and failed to pay the same.
Therefore, plaintiff issued demand notice through his advocate on
18/02/2020. The said notice was duly served on defendant but still
defendant failed and neglected to pay the amount. Therefore plaintiff
has filed present suit.
3. Defendant was duly served with writ of summons on
20.01.2021. However, he did not appear before this Court and as such
suit proceeded exparte against him.
4. In support of claim, plaintiff filed his affidavit of claim at
Exhibit6 and reiterated his claim of recovery of Rs.2,00,000/ along
with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. Plaintiff has filed and relied upon
following documents.
Sr.
No.
Exhibit
No. Particulars
1 Exh.8 Demand promissory note of Rs.2,00,000/
dtd.15/06/2019.
2 Exh.9 Office copy of demand notice dated 18.02.2020
alongwith the postal records.
-- 2 of 6 --
3
5. So as to decide the present suit following points arise for my
consideration. I have recorded my findings for the reasons as under :
Sr.
No.
Points/Issues Findings
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to
recover principal amount of
Rs.2,00,000/ from defendant?
If yes, at what rate interest?
Plaintiff is entitled to
recover an amount of
Rs. 2,00,000/ from the
defendant along with
interest @ 9% p.a. from
date of filing of the suit
till realization.
2. What order and decree? Suit is decreed as per
final order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1
6. This being a suit for recovery of an amount, it is imperative to
examine whether the plaintiff has placed on record the requisite
evidence to prove its entitlement.
7. Plaintiff has filed his claim affidavit in support of his
contentions of receipt of promissory note for consideration of
Rs.2,00,000/. His oral testimony is supported by the original
promissory note dated 15.06.2019. Plaintiff enjoys presumption under
Section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which supports the
contention of plaintiff that the present promissory note was issued for
the valuable consideration of Rs.2,00,000/.
8. As noted above, plaintiff has filed demand promissory note
dated 15.06.2019 which reveals that the plaintiff has lent amount of
-- 3 of 6 --
4
Rs.2,00,000/ to the defendant on interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The
said demand note bears signature of defendant along with his thumb
impression with endorsement ‘received in cash’. The address
mentioned on the demand note and the address mentioned in the
recovery notice placed on record by the plaintiff at Exhibit9 is the
same. The summons in the present matter was duly served on the same
address. The notice was sent on his home address as well as his office
address. Thus, fact of lending amount as claimed by the plaintiff in this
claim affidavit is supported by the documents placed on record. As there
is no contra evidence on record, the said fact goes unchallenged. Hence,
I hold that the plaintiff had lent an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ to the
defendant.
9. The defendant has not appeared in the matter in spite of the
receipt of summons from this Court, which gives an inference that
defendant has nothing to contest and he do not dispute the claim of the
plaintiff. Hence, I hold an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ is due and payable
to the plaintiff from the defendant. Hence, I answer point no.1 in
affirmative.
10. So far as claim of interest is concerned, plaintiff has claimed
interest at the rate of 18 % p.a. Same is excessive as compared to rate of
interest of Nationalized Banks. Therefore, I find it just and proper to
grant interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till
its realization.
AS TO POINT NO.2.
11. From the findings recorded to the point No.1, it is clear that
plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.2,00,000/ from the
defendant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Hence, in
answer to point No. 2, I proceed to pass following order.
-- 4 of 6 --
5
ORDER
1) Summary Suit No. 575 of 2020 is hereby partly decreed.
2) Defendant do pay on amount of Rs.2,00,000/ (Rupees Two
Lakhs Only) to the plaintiff alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date of filing of the suit i.e. 15/09/2020, till realization
of entire amount.
3. Plaintiff is entitled for refund of court fees as per rules.
4) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
Date 06/10/2022. (Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Court Room No.61
-- 5 of 6 --
6
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF TYPIST
17/10/2022 5.45PM Mr. SUHAS DADARAO MAHURE
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Dr. S.D. Tawshikar
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
06/10/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 17/10/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 17/10/2022
-- 6 of 6 --