Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 1 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
MHCC010043462018
Presented on : 02-04-2018
Registered on : 21-06-2018
Decided on : 24-01-2022
Duration : 3 years, 9 months, 22 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 685 OF 2021
(OLD SUMMARY SUIT NO. 657 OF 2018)
Exh.22.
Bank Of India, a body Corporate, )
Constituted under the Banking Companies )
(Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) )
Act1970, having their Head Office at Star )
House, Plot No. C/5, 'G' Block, Bandra Kurla )
Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051, and )
one of its Branch Offices amongst others known )
as Gandhi Market Branch situated at )
Plot No. 1819/290A, Anand Nagar, Flank Road, )
Mumbai – 400 037, through its Power of Attorney )
Holder Mr. Harikumar S., age 43 yrs., Senior Manager )
(Law) of the Plaintiff )...Plaintiff
Versus
1. Saini Tours And Travels )
A Proprietorship Concern, having address )
at Flat No. 405, Parth Complex, )
Plot No.307, Sector21, Kamothe, Panvel, )
Raigad – 410 206 )
2. Mr. Manjit Singh Saini )
Prop. of Saini Tours and Travels )
Adult, Indian Inhabitant having address at )
Flat No.405, Parth Complex, Plot No.307, )
Sector21, Kamothe, Panvel, Raigad – 410 206 )...Defendants
-- 1 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 2 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI R.R.BHAGWAT.
(COURT ROOM NO.31).
DATE : 24th JANUARY, 2022.
Ms. Priyanka Sugdare, Advocate for the plaintiff.
Defendants – (Exparte).
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 Gandhi Market. Constituted Attorney
Harikumar S. filed the suit for the plaintiff bank. Defendant no.1 is a
proprietary concern represented by defendant no.2 proprietor Manjit
Saini. On an application of defendant no.2, the plaintiff had sanctioned
STRO Loan of Rs.8,34,000/ to the defendants for purchasing Skoda
Rapid Car having No. MH46AD1525. Accordingly, sanction letter
was issued on 10/12/2015. Defendant no.2 also executed other
documents including Deed of Hypothecation of the vehicle. Though the
loan amount was to be repaid with monthly installments of Rs.19,000/
within period of 60 months with interest at the rate of 12.20% p.a., the
defendants committed breach in repayment of the loan amount.
Account of the defendants turned NPA on 30/09/2017. Then, legal
notice was issued on 14/03/2018 calling upon the defendants to pay
outstanding amount, but the defendants failed to make payment.
Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of outstanding amount of
Rs.7,81,318.41 with further interest at the rate of 11.95% p.a. with
-- 2 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 3 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
monthly rests plus penal interest of 2% p.a. from the date of filing of
the suit till the date of realization with costs of the suit. He also made
prayer seeking declaration that the loan is duly secured by valid and
subsisting hypothecation of Skoda Rapid Car No. MH46AD1525.
3. The defendants are duly served with writ of summons as
per affidavit of service (Exh.6), but they failed to appear and oppose the
claim of the plaintiff. Therefore, my learned predecessor passed the ex
parte order against them on 16/01/2020.
4. PW 1 Chandraprakash Panwar, Officer of the plaintiff bank
deposed on evidence affidavit (Exh.7) and proved documents filed with
list of documents (Exh.8). Proved documents are at Exh.9 to 20. The
plaintiff closed evidence vide pursis (Exh.21). Heard learned counsel
Miss Priyanka Sugdare 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.7,81,318.41 from the defendants ? If
yes, at what rate of interest ? In the Affirmative.
@ 11.95% p.a. with
monthly rest.
2. Does the plaintiff prove that he is
entitled to declaration that the loan is
duly secured by valid and subsisting
hypothecation of Skoda Rapid Car No.
MH46AD1525 ? In the Affirmative.
-- 3 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 4 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
3. What order as to costs ? As per final order.
4. What order and decree ? Suit is partly
decreed.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS.1 TO 3 :
6. PW 1 Chandraprakash Panwar has specifically stated that
the loan amount enumerated in the plaint was sanctioned for
purchasing the vehicle to the defendants. The said vehicle is also
hypothecated as per Exh.14. The defendants failed to make payment.
The defendants neglected to make payment of outstanding loan amount
as stated in statement of account (Exh.19). 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 within the range of interest as per terms of the agreement with
the defendants. There is no hurdle in the way of granting interest as
demanded by the plaintiff. It does not appear to be appropriate to grant
2% penal interest because the defendants had obtained loan for
purchasing the vehicle in order to earn livelihood. So far as the second
relief claimed by the plaintiff is concerned, it is based upon Deed of
Hypothecation (Exh.14). As hypothecation of the vehicle is established,
there is no difficulty in granting declaratory relief as prayed. Costs of
the suit is liable to be imposed on the defendants. In the light of above
discussion, I record my finding as to points no.1 and 2 in the
affirmative. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Commercial Suit No. 685/2021 is partly decreed.
-- 4 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 5 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
2. The defendants are directed to pay amount of
Rs.7,81,318.41 (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eightyone Thousand
Three Hundred Eighteen and Paise Fortyone Only) to the
plaintiff with interest @ 11.95% 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. It is hereby declared that the said loan is duly secured by
valid and subsisting hypothecation of Skoda Rapid Car No.
MH46AD1525.
4. Defendants no.1 and 2 shall be jointly and severally liable
to pay the decretal amount to the plaintiff.
5. Court fees shall be refunded to the plaintiff as per rules.
6. The defendants shall bear the costs of the suit.
7. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(R.R.BHAGWAT)
Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
(Court Room No.31)
Date : 24/01/2022. Mumbai.
1. Dictated online on : 24/01/2022.
2. Signed on : 24/01/2022.
3. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
-- 5 of 6 --
Comm.Suit No. 685/21. 6 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.22).
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
24/01/2022. 2.49 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 24/01/2022.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 24/01/2022.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 24/01/2022.
-- 6 of 6 --