Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 29 Jul 2022 · CNR MHCC010070802018
Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement Pdf Text: 1 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 Lodged on : 13.06.2018 Admitted on : 28.06.2018 Decided on : 29.07.2022 Duration : Y M D 4 1 16 COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 244 OF 2021 (Old S.C. SUIT NO. 1585 OF 2018) CNR NO. : MHCC010070802018 Exh.16 Canara Bank, a body corporate constituted under the banking Companies (Acquisition and transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its head office at 112 J.C. Road Bangaluru – 560002) and having branch office at 10, Homji Street, Domestic Branch, 1st Floor, Fort, Mumbai – 400 023. ...Plaintiff Versus Santosh Ashok Sakre Aged about 32 years, Indian Inhabitant, Prop. of M/s. Shree Ganesh Travels, having address at Room No. 9418, Parshuram Nagar, CWard, G.D.Ambedkar Marg, Near Milan Industry, Kalachowki, Mumbai – 400 033. ...Defendant Appearance: Adv. Mr. Vineet Dubey for Plaintiff. Defendant exparte. CORAM : SHRI. A.S.SALGAR ADHOC JUDGE, (C.R.NO.31) DATED : 29th JULY 2022 -- 1 of 6 -- 2 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 J U D G M E N T (Delivered on : 29.07.2022) The plaintiff bank has filed the present suit for recovery of the amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. from the defendant. The brief facts of the plaintiff's case is as under: 2. The plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking), Act 1970. The defendant applied for the loan on 20.10.2015 from the plaintiff bank of Rs. 4,50,000/ for purchasing four wheeler Maruti Ritz LXI. As per the application of the defendant, the plaintiff bank sanctioned loan to the defendant on 21.10.2015. The defendant has executed various documents in favour of the plaintiff bank for obtaining loan. The defendant agreed to repay the loan with EMI each of Rs. 7,825/. The defendant has failed and neglected to pay the outstanding amount, which resulted into classification of loan account as NPA with effect from 02.05.2017. According to the plaintiff, the total amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. is outstanding from the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff has prayed for decree against the defendant for recovery of the said amount with further rate of interest at the rate of 12.75% per annum. 3. In view of order dated 27.07.2022, the suit is proceeded ex parte against the defendant. 4. In support of the claim, the plaintiff bank examined its branch Manager Vinay Kumar Vaidhya at Exh.5. The plaintiff also filed the documents at Exh.7 to 14. The evidence closure pursis of the plaintiff is at Exh.15. -- 2 of 6 -- 3 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 5. After considering the pleadings of the plaintiff and evidence on record, following points arise for my determination and I have recorded my finding against each of them with the reasons to follows: POINTS FINDING 1) Whether plaintiff proves that an amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. is due from the defendant ? In the affirmative. 2) Whether plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. from the defendant? If yes, at what rate of interest ? In the affirmative. At the rate of Rs.12% per annum. 3) What order and decree? Suit is decreed with costs. R E A S O N S 4. Heard Learned Advocate Mr. Vineet Dubey for the plaintiff. 5. As per the submission of the plaintiff, the loan was obtained by the defendant on 21.10.2015. The transaction took place between the parties on 21.10.2015. The suit was filed by the plaintiff on 13.06.2018. If the said period is calculated, it is found that the suit is filed within three years from the date of transaction. Hence, the suit is within limitation. As to point nos. 1 & 2 6. Both these points are interconnected with each other. Hence, for avoiding repetition of evidence, I discuss both these points simultaneously. According to the plaintiff, on the request of the -- 3 of 6 -- 4 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 defendant, the plaintiff bank sanctioned loan of Rs.4,50,000/ to the defendant for purchasing Maruti Ritz LXI. The defendant executed various documents in favour of the plaintiff bank and thereby agreed to repay the loan amount with interest. However, the defendant failed to repay the loan amount. According to the plaintiff, an amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. is outstanding from the defendant. In support of the pleading, the plaintiff bank examined its branch Manager namely Vinay Kumar Vaidhya at Exh.5. He deposed in support of the suit claim. The oral evidence of the plaintiff bank manager is in consonance with the averments made in the plaint. The aforesaid oral evidence of the plaintiff is not challenged by the defendant. The defendant failed to conduct the cross examination of the plaintiff. Therefore, the evidence of the plaintiff cannot be disbelieved. 7. The oral evidence of the plaintiff is supported by documentary evidence at Exh.7 to 14. Loan application dated 20.10.2015 at Exh.8 along with Sanction letter at Exh.9 show that the defendant has applied to the plaintiff bank for sanction of the loan amount of Rs.4,50,000/. The plaintiff bank has sanctioned loan of Rs.4,50,000/ to the defendant with rate of interest of 10.95% per annum. Accordingly, the defendant has executed Hypothecation Agreement at Exh.10 and undertaking letter at Exh.12 in favour of the plaintiff bank. All these documents along with oral evidence of P.W.1 proved that the defendant obtained loan of Rs.4,50,000/ from the plaintiff bank along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The statement of account at Exh.14 shows that on 31.05.2018, an amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. is due and payable from the defendant. The particulars of the claim is also filed. The defendant has failed to pay the -- 4 of 6 -- 5 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 outstanding amount to the plaintiff. As per the terms of contract, the plaintiff is entitled to charge interest at the rate of 12% per annum. Hence, the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover an amount of Rs. 4,50,583.17ps. along with future interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization. Accordingly, I answer point nos. 1 & 2 in the Affirmative. In view of my finding as to point nos. 1 & 2, I answer point no. 3 accordingly and pass the following order : ORDER 1) Commercial Suit No. 244 of 2021 is decreed with costs. 2) The defendant do pay to the plaintiff an amount of Rs.4,50,583.17ps. (Rs. Four Lakh Fifty Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Three and Seventeen Paise only) along with future interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization. 3) The defendant shall bear the cost of the suit. 4) Court fee, if any, be refunded to the plaintiff as per rule. 5) Decree be drawn up accordingly. (Judgment pronounced in the open Court) Dated : 29.07.2022 (A.S. Salgar) Adhoc Judge, City Civil Court Gr. Mumbai. Dictated on : 29.07.2022 Typed on : 29.07.2022 & 30.07.2022 -- 5 of 6 -- 6 Judgment in Commercial Suit No. 244/2021 CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER” UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER 01.08.2022 11.40 a.m. Prachi Y. Potdar Stenographer Grade I Name of the Judge HHJ Shri. A.S. Salgar (C.R.NO. 31) Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order. 29.07.2022 Judgment/order signed by P.O on 30.07.2022 Judgment/order uploaded on 01.08.2022 -- 6 of 6 --
