Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 1 : Judgement
MHCC010062382018
Presented on : 05052018
Registered on : 22032019
Decided on : 02042024
Duration : YY: MM : DD
05 : 10 : 28
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON, BOMBAY
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 368 Of 2021
(OLD SUMMARY SUIT NO.451 OF 2019)
Exhibit20
Bank of Maharashtra
A Banking Corporation Constituted under
the Banking Companies (Acquisition and
Transfer of Undertaking) Act V of 1970
having its Head Office at Lokmangal, 1501,
Shivajinagar, Pune 411 005.
And a Branch Office amongst others, Vikas
Apartment, Chamarbaugwala Lane, Parel
East, Mumbai 400012. ... Plaintiff.
V/s.
Kanuparthy Sai Vishal
Age: 22 Years, Address: Flat No. 401,
Meghdoot Apartment, Sector No. 26, Vashi,
Navi Mumbai 400705. ... Defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. VIRENDRA. D. KEDAR
(COURT ROOM NO.14)
DATE : 02nd DAY OF APRIL 2024
: Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Sachin Joshi for Plaintiff.
Defendant Exparte.
-- 1 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 2 : Judgement
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of sum of
Rs.9,52,865/ together with interest on Rs. 8,86,995/ @ 9.25% per
annum with monthly rests from the date hereof till its full realization.
Initially the plaintiff has filed Summary Suit No.451 of 2019 for
recovery of above said amount against the defendant. However, later on
as per office order dated 03.04.2021, it is converted in the Commercial
Suit.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are as under:
The plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under the Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act V of 1970.
The plaintiff carries on business of banking.
3. The defendant is carrying on business of trading in Agro foods.
In the month of December 2016, the defendant approached to the
plaintiff bank with request to grant Term Loan Facility to the extent of
Rs. 9,55,000/. Accordingly, the plaintiff has sanctioned said loan on
16.12.2016 upon executing necessary documents by the defendant in
favour of the plaintiff.
4. It is submitted that; the defendant became very irregular in
payment of instalments and has committed defaults in repayment the
same. The defendant has only paid part amount of Rs.68,005/.
Therefore, the plaintiff through its advocate has issued notice dated
27.11.2017, thereby called upon to the defendant to clear outstanding
amount with interest. In spite of receiving notice the defendant failed to
pay the same. Hence, the suit.
-- 2 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 3 : Judgement
5. In spite of service, the defendant failed to appear hence, suit
proceeded Exparte against him vide order dated 17.01.2024.
6. In support of its claim, the plaintiff has examined PW1 Mr.
Kunal Rakesh, Principal Officer of the Plaintiff's Parel Branch at Exh.10.
The plaintiff got proved document through this witness filed alongwith
list Exh.11. The plaintiff has also filed Evidence Closing Pursis at
Exh.19.
7. Heard the learned Advocate for the plaintiff. Perused the record.
8. Following points arise for my determination, to which I have
given my findings with reasons as follows:
Sr.
No.
Points Findings
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for
recovery of amount of Rs.9,52,865/
together with interest on
Rs.8,86,995/ @ 9.25% per annum
with monthly rests from the date
hereof till its full realization, as
claimed?
Partly Yes.
2. What Order and Decree? As per final order.
REASONS
As to point no.1:
9. The plaintiff has examined PW1 Mr. Kunal. He deposed as
per the contents of the plaint averments. Hence, I do not want to
reproduce the same to avoid the repetitions. The plaintiff has filed copy
of Authority Letter dated 26.02.2024 at Exh.18, thereby, the witness is
-- 3 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 4 : Judgement
authorised to depose on behalf of the plaintiff's bank.
10. The Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff argued that, as per request
of the defendant, the plaintiff Bank has sanctioned Term Loan Facility
of Rs.9,55,000/ on 16.12.2016 upon executing certain documents by
the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant has made part
payment of Rs.68,005/ only, leaving behind a sum of Rs.8,86,995/. In
spite of repeated request and reminders, the defendant failed and
neglected to repay the balance amount. Despite of receiving legal
demand notice dated 27.11.2017, the defendant failed to clear the
outstanding amount. To substantiate its claim, the plaintiff's Bank filed
documents such as; Request letter for cash credit loan against
Hypothecation of Goods, Plant and Machinery dated 16.12.2016
(Exh.12); Demand Promissory Note dated 16.12.2016 (Exh.13);
Composite Deed of Hypothecation dated 16.12.2016 (Exh.14); Receipt
for amount of Load dated 16.12.2016 (Exh.15); Statement of accounts
certified by the Plaintiff's Bank manager (Exh.16) and Certificate under
section 65B of Indian Evidence Act marked as Exh. 17.
11. Upon perusal of pleadings and documents filed on record,
the plaintiff duly proved its claim. Herein it is to be seen that in spite of
receiving writ of summons the defendant failed to enter his appearance
and thus, in view of Order 37 Rule 2(3) of CPC, the plaintiff is entitled
to a decree for any sum, not exceeding the sum mentioned in the
summons, together with interest. The loan has been sanctioned on
16.12.2016. The defendant makes part payment and thereafter, failed
to pay remaining amount, hence, notice was issued on 27.11.2017.
Thus, the suit lodged on 05.05.2018 is well within limitation. So far as,
rate of interest is concerned, the defendant admitted to pay it along
-- 4 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 5 : Judgement
with interest @ 9.25 % per annum. Hence, my answer to point no. 1 is
in affirmative.
AS TO POINT NO.2.
12. In view of my above discussions, I pass the following order;
ORDER
1. Commercial Suit No.368 of 2021 (Old Summary Suit No.451 of
2019) is decreed with Costs.
2. The defendant does pay an amount of Rs.9,52,865/ together with
interest on Rs.8,86,995/ @ 9.25% per annum with monthly rests from
the date hereof till its full realization.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
4. Commercial Suit No.368 of 2021 (Old Summary Suit No.451 of 2019)
disposed of accordingly.
Sd/
(Virendra D. Kedar)
Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date:.02.04.2024 Mazgaon, Gr. Mumbai
(C.R. No.14)
Dictated on : 02.04.2024
Directly typed on : 02.04.2024
Signed on : 02.04.2024
-- 5 of 6 --
Com. Suit No.368/2021 : 6 : Judgement
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE: 03.04.2024 NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
TIME: 01.50 p.m. Mr. Ashok Sudhakar Patil
Name of the Judge (With Court
room no.)
HHJ Shri Virendra D.Kedar
(Court Room No.14)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
02.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
02.04.2024
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 03.04.2024
-- 6 of 6 --