Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 18 Apr 2023 · CNR MHCC010047062020
Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement Pdf Text: 1 MHCC010047062020 Presented on :03102020 Registered on :29102020 Decided on :18042023 Duration :2Y6M15D EXHIBIT7 IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY SUMMARY SUIT NO. 406 OF 2020 MAHAVIR LALCHAND RATHOD Age 45 Yrs, of Mumbai, an adult, Indian Inhabitant, having his address at 140, Pine Bldg, D'lima Street, Dockyard (East), Mumbai400 010. ...Plaintiff Versus DILIP NAMDEO RAUT age not known of Mumbai an adult Indian Inhabitant, working for gain with Mazagon Dock Ltd Pipe Fitter, Special Grade Pipe Shop Dept, EMP ID.No.00013385 Dockyard (East) Mumbai400 010 and residing At 359/13, Sai Krupa CHS. Sector No.3, Near Ambe Mata Mandir, Charkop, Kandivali (West), Mumbai400 067. ...Defendant Appearance : Ld. Advocate Mr. Ramesh Jain for plaintiff. None for defendant (Exparte). -- 1 of 6 -- 2 CORAM : DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR C. R. NO. : 61 DATE : 18/04/2023 Judgment (Dictated and pronounced in open Court) This is the suit filed under rule 2 of order XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for recovery of principal sum of Rs.70,000/ along with interest thereon at the rate of 15% per annum till its realization. PLAINTIFF’S CASE 2. Plaintiff is a licensed Money Lender. He had lent a sum of Rs.70,000/ to the defendant on 05/10/2017 in cash. Defendant had issued Demand Promissory note of Rs.70,000/ in favour of the plaintiff on the same day. Defendant agreed to pay the amount on demand along with interest at the rate of 15% p.a. 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 03/03/2018. In spite of the notice defendant failed and neglected to pay the amount. Therefore plaintiff has filed present suit. 3. Defendant was duly served with writ of summons on 18.03.2021. However, he did not cause appearance before this Court and therefore suit proceeded exparte against him. 4. In support of claim, plaintiff filed his affidavit of claim at Exhibit3 and reiterated his claim of recovery of Rs.70,000/ along with interest at the rate of 15% p.a. Plaintiff has filed and relied upon following documents. -- 2 of 6 -- 3 Sr. No. Exhibit No. Particulars 1 Exh.5 Demand Promissory note of Rs.70,000/ dtd.05/10/2017. 2 Exh.6 Office copy of demand notice dated 03.03.2018 along with envelops, returned unserved. 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.70,000/ from defendant? If yes, at what rate interest? Plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.70,000/ 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 partly 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 his entitlement. 7. Plaintiff has filed his claim affidavit in support of his contentions of receipt of promissory note for consideration of Rs.70,000/. His oral testimony is supported by the original promissory note dated 05.10.2017. Plaintiff enjoys presumption under Section 118(a) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which supports the -- 3 of 6 -- 4 contention of plaintiff that the present promissory note was issued for the valuable consideration of Rs.70,000/. 8. 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 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 defendant admits the allegations contained in the plaint. Hence, I hold an amount of Rs.70,000/ is due and payable to the plaintiff from the defendant. Hence, I answer point No.1 in affirmative. 9. 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. Considering nature of transaction and time lapsed from date of lending of amount, 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. 10. From the findings recorded to the point No.1, it is clear that plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.70,000/ 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. ORDER 1) Summary Suit No.406 of 2020 is hereby partly decreed with costs. 2) Defendant do pay on amount of Rs.70,000/ (Rupees Seventy Thousands Only) to the plaintiff along with interest at the -- 4 of 6 -- 5 rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit i.e. 03/10/2020, till realization of entire amount. 3) Plaintiff is entitled for refund of court fees as per rules. 4) Decree be drawn up accordingly. Date 18/04/2023. (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 19/04/2023 3.22PM 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 18/04/2023 JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 18/04/2023 JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 18/04/2023 -- 6 of 6 --
