Order 1

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 --