Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 27 Feb 2020 · CNR MHCC010048442018
Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement Pdf Text: 1 Lodged on : 12/04/2018 Registered on : 01/08/2018 Decided on: 27/02/2020 Duration : Y :M :D IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 237 OF 2020 S.C. SUIT NO.1953 OF 2018 (CNR NO.MHCC01-004844-2018) General Insurance Corporation of India ) A Govt Company having its office at ) “Suraksha”, 170 J.Tata Road, Churchgate ) Mumbai 400 020. )...Plaintiff. Versus 1. Krishnedu Shekhar ) age not known ) as ex-employee having his address at ) C/o.Geetanjali Pradhan Plot No.692 ) Behera Sahi, Nayapali, Bhubaneshwar, ) Odisha-751012. ) 2. Siraj Kumar Mishra ) age not known ) having his address at A-102, ) Sriram Vihar Apartments, ) Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar ) Odisha-751001. ) 3. Nityanand Dwivedi ) age not known ) Having his address at Chief Electrical ) Inspector (T & D) Unit 5, ) Power House Square, ) -- 1 of 10 -- 2 Vidyut Marg, Bhubaneshwar ) Odisha 751 001. )...Defendants. Appearance:- Ld.Advocate Ms.Vaishali Ugale for plaintiff. None for defendants. CLAIM: Recovery of amount . CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI R.V. KOKARE DATE : 27/02/2020 (C.R.No.31) JUDGMENT This is a suit filed by the plaintiff Insurance Company for recovery of an amount of Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. with further interest @ 12%p.a. from date of filing of the suit . Brief facts of the plaintiffs case are as under:- 2. The plaintiff is a Government Company carriying on business of reinsurance. The defendant no.1 is an Ex-employee of the plaintiff Company. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 are the Guarantors under a written bond executed by the defendants. The defendant no.1 was appointed on probation as an Asst Manager (Scale-I)vide appointment letter dated 6/02/2012. The defendant no.1 was given residential induction programme Training by experts for two weeks at National Insurance Academy, Pune. On completion of training offered appointment to the post of Asst. Manager (Scale-I) at a monthly basis salary of Rs.17,240/- plus all allowances as applicable; put on probation for one year which period was extendable upto one year. The defendant no.1 was confirmed in service on 10th February 2013. The defendant no. 1 as an employee of the plaintiff, was governed by the General -- 2 of 10 -- 3 Insurance (Conduct: Discipline & Appeal) Rules. 3. The plaintiff Insurance Company further states that on confirmation, the defendant no.1 was posted as Asstt. Manager in Head Office of the plaintiff at “Suraksha” Mumbai. After confirmation with a few months the defendant no.1 started remaining absent without any prior intimation or sanction. The defendant no.1 was sent reminders calling upon the defendant no.1 to resume duties. The defendant no.1 was holding an important post in the Head Office of the plaintiff and the unauthorized absence of defendant no.1 from 16th September, 2013 was affecting the plaintiff’s efficiency and was creating administrative problems for the plaintiff. Hence, by its letter dated 7/2/2014, the defendant no. 1 was asked to report for duty immediately, told about his misconduct as per the service rules, warned that disciplinary action may taken against defendant no.1 which may culminate in termination of service of the defendant no.1. 4. The plaintiff Company further submits that the defendant no.1 had executed a service bond styled as “ Guarantee Bond”. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 were parties to the said bond as Guarantors. The defendants agreed that the defendant no.1 shall diligently serve the plaintiff for a period of four years from the date of joining, if the defendant no.1 resigned before expiry of bond period, the defendant no.1 shall be liable to pay liquidated damages equivalent to one year’s gross salary during probation, if the plaintiff terminated the service of the defendant no.1 for misconduct, fraud or dishonestly or for breeze of rules and regulations, the defendant would be liable to pay liquidated damages equivalent to one year’s gross salary paid during in a year of probation. -- 3 of 10 -- 4 5. The plaintiff company further submits that in view of dismissal order the bond money became payable. The plaintiff wrote to the defendant nos.2 and 3 by its letter dated 15/09/2016, calling on them to pay the bond money of Rs. 2,23,858/- . Th said letter was served on defendant nos. 2 and 3 as per reports of the Postal Department. There was neither any response from the defendant nos.2 and 3 nor compliance. The plaintiff wrote to the defendant no.1 vide its letter dated 15/12/2017, calling on him to pay up total amount of Rs.4,26,048.43p.s. The said notice served on the defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 was neither any reply nor compliance/payment. Hence, this suit for recovery of total amount of Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. alongwith further interest @ 12% p.a. from filing of the suit till its realization. 6. Suit summons is duly served on the defendants. Despite of service of summons, the defendants failed to appear before the Court. Therefore, on 03/10/2019, exparte order passed against the defendants. 7. Heard Ld.advocate Ms.Vaishali Ugale for the plaintiff Insurance Company. In view of the pleadings of the plaintiffs, following points arose for my determination. I have recorded, my findings against each of points alongwith my reasons are as follows. Sr. No. Points Findings 1 Does the plaintiff Company prove that amount of Rs.Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. is due against the defendants ? -yes- 2 Is plaintiff entitled to recover amount of Yes. Plaintiff is -- 4 of 10 -- 5 Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. with further interest @ 12%p.a. from filing of the suit ? entitled to recover amount of Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. with further interest @ 6% p.a. 3 Whether the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay decreetal amount to the plaintiff Company? -yes- 4 What order and decree ? As per final order REASONS 8. In order to prove case of the plaintiff Company, the plaintiff Company has examined P.W.1-S.Ramakrishnan , Asst. General Manager of the plaintiff Company by way of evidence affidavit at Exhibit-6. The plaintiff company has produced documentary evidence under list of documents at Exhibit-7. The oral as well as documentary evidence of the plaintiff company has gone unchallenged. As to point nos. 1 to 3- 9. On scrutiny of the testimony of the P.W.1-S.Ramkrishnan, Asst. General Manager of the plaintiff company at Exhibit- 6, it appears that the evidence affidavit of the P.W.1 is nothing but it is reproduction of the contents of the plaint. In the evidence of P.W.1, The plaintiff is a Government Company carrying on business of reinsurance. The defendant no.1 is an Ex-employee of the plaintiff Company. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 are the Guarantors under a written bond executed by the defendants. The defendant no.1 was appointed on probation as an Asst Manager (Scale-I)vide appointment letter dated 6/02/2012. The defendant no.1 was given residential induction -- 5 of 10 -- 6 programme Training by experts for two weeks at National Insurance Academy, Pune. On completion of training offered appointment to the post of Asst. Manager (Scale-I) at a monthly basis salary of Rs.17,240/- plus all allowances as applicable; put on probation for one year which period was extendable upto one year. The defendant no.1 was confirmed in service on 10th February 2013. The defendant no. 1 as an employee of the plaintiff, was governed by the General Insurance (Conduct: Discipline & Appeal) Rules. 10. The P.W.1 has further deposed that on confirmation, the defendant no.1 was posted as Asstt. Manager in Head Office of the plaintiff at “Suraksha” Mumbai. After confirmation with a few months the defendant no.1 started remaining absent without any prior intimation or sanction. The defendant no.1 was sent reminders calling upon the defendant no.1 to resume duties. The defendant no.1 was holding an important post in the Head Office of the plaintiff and the unauthorized absence of defendant no.1 from 16th September, 2013 was affecting the plaintiff’s efficiency and was creating administrative problems for the plaintiff. Hence, by its letter dated 7/2/2014, the defendant no. 1 was asked to report for duty immediately, told about his misconduct as per the service rules, warned that disciplinary action may taken against defendant no.1 which may culminate in termination of service of the defendant no.1. 11. The P.W.1 has further deposed that the defendant no.1 had executed a service bond styled as “ Guarantee Bond”. The defendant nos. 2 and 3 were parties to the said bond as Guarantors. The defendants agreed that the defendant no.1 shall diligently serve the plaintiff for a period of four years from the date of joining, if the -- 6 of 10 -- 7 defendant no.1 resigned before expiry of bond period, the defendant no.1 shall be liable to pay liquidated damages equivalent to one year’s gross salary during probation, if the plaintiff terminated the service of the defendant no.1 for misconduct, fraud or dishonestly or for breeze of rules and regulations, the defendant would be liable to pay liquidated damages equivalent to one year’s gross salary paid during in a year of probation. 12. The P.W.1 has further deposed that in view of dismissal order the bond money became payable. The plaintiff wrote to the defendant nos.2 and 3 by its letter dated 15/09/2016, calling on them to pay the bond money of Rs. 2,23,858/- . Th said letter was served on defendant nos. 2 and 3 as per reports of the Postal Department. There was neither any response from the defendant nos.2 and 3 nor compliance. The plaintiff wrote to the defendant no.1 vide its letter dated 15/12/2017, calling on him to pay up total amount of Rs.4,26,048.43p.s. The said notice served on the defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 was neither any reply nor compliance/payment. 13. Inspite of oral evidence of the plaintiff Company, the plaintiff company has produced documentary evidence under list of documents at Exhibit-07. They are as Office Order dated 8th November, 2019 at Exhibit-8, Office copy of the appointment letter dated 06/02/2012 at Exhibit-9, Copy of the General Insurance Rules dated 10th February, 2013 at Exhibit-10, Letter dated 18th November 2013 addressed to the defendant no.1 at Exhibit-11, Letter dated 7th February, 2014 addressed to the defendant no.1 at Exhibit-12, Notice dated 13th August, 2014 addressed to the defendant no.1 at Exhibit-13, Office Note dated 15th October, 2015 at Exhibit-14, Order dated 09/12/2015 passed by -- 7 of 10 -- 8 Disciplinary Authority at Exhibit-15, Times of India newspaper showing publication on 6/06/2016 at Exhibit-16, Order dated 18th July, 2016 passed by Disciplinary Authority at Exhibit-17, Times of India newspaper showing publication on 22/07/2016 at Exhibit-18, Gaurantee bond dated 27/1/2012 at Exhibit-19, Letter dated 15/09/2016 addressed to Mr.Nityanand Dwivedi at Exhibit-20, Letter dated 15/09/2016 addressed to Mr.Shriraj Mishra at Exhibit-21, Postal Receipt at Exhibit-22. 14. It is pertinent to note that oral as well as documentary evidence of the plaintiff Company has gone unchallenged. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff Company has proved its case. Therefore, I have answered on point nos. 1 to 3 are in affirmative. Hence, I proceed to pass following order. ORDER 1. The suit of the plaintiff company is hereby decreed with costs. 2. The defendants shall jointly and severally pay total amount of Rs.5,11,427.48p.s. to the plaintiff Company with further interest @ 6% p.a. from date of filing of the the suit till its realization. 3. Decree be drawn up accordingly. Date : 27/02/2020. (R.V.Kokare) Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay. Dictated on :27/02/2020 Directly dictated on Computer :27/02/2020 Signed by HHJ: 29/02/2020 -- 8 of 10 -- 9 CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER” UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER 29/02/2020 5.00p.m. Mrs. V.V.Malgaonkar Name of the Judge HHJ Shri R.V.Kokare(CR No.31) Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 27/02/2020 Judgment/order signed by P.O on 29/02/2020 Judgment/order uploaded on 29/02/2020 -- 9 of 10 -- 10 -- 10 of 10 --
