Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
Lodged on : 24.06.2018
Registered on : 01.08.2018
Decided on : 06.03.2021
Duration : Y M D
2 7 5
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO. 1952 of 2018
CNR NO.: MHCC01-007095-2018
Union Bank of India, a body corporate
constituted under the Banking Companies
Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act V,
1970 and having its Head Office at 239,
Union Bank Bhavan, Union Bank Marg,
Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 and
Amongst it’s one of the Branch at Union Bank
of India Ashoka Complex, Ranade Road,
Dadar (West) Branch, Dadar, Mumbai – 400 028
Through its authorized officer, Moreshwar
Kashinath Jangle Chief Manager of the
Dadar (W) Branch, Mumbai – 400 028. ...Plaintiff
Versus
Ramlakhan Kashiram Shukla an adult of
Mumbai Indian Inhabitant carrying on the
business as a Sole Proprietor in the name and
style of M/s. Radhe Krishna Tours & Travels
having place of business at Room No. 468,
Adarsh Indira Nagar, Navghar Road,
Near S.M. College, Bhayander (East),
Thane – 401105. ….Defendant
Appearances:-
Advocate Pratibha Mehta for the Plaintiff.
Defendant ex-parte.
-- 1 of 7 --
2 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
CORAM : SMT. S.S. NAGUR,
JUDGE,
(C.R.NO.20)
DATED : 6th MARCH 2021
Suit for recovery of Rs. 5,50,810.28/-
J U D G M E N T
The plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of car loan for amount
of Rs. 5,50,810.28/-
Brief facts of the plaintiff's case is as under :-
2. The plaintiff is a corporate body constituted under Banking
Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act V, 1970. The
defendant is carrying on business of sole proprietor in the firm by name
“M/s. Radhekrishna Tours and Travels”. The defendant is doing business
of renting car in UBER. The defendant applied for car loan. The plaintiff
has sanctioned the credit facility i.e. term loan under the aegis of
Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojna to enable defendant to develop its
business. The plaintiff vide sanction letter bearing reference No. Ref :
DDR/ADV/2016 dated 31.03.2106 sanctioned credit facility to the
extent of Rs. 6,44,000/-.
3. The plaintiff stated that the defendant has accepted the terms and
conditions for the term loan and executed documents. The defendant
purchased the said vehicle from one M/s. Ritu Automobiles Private
Limited. The plaintiff vide its letter Ref. No. UBI:RM:DAD dated
05.04.2016 issued a Pay Order bearing no. 30520824 dated 31.03.2016
for Rs.6,44,000/-. On receipt of the above Demand Draft, the dealer
handed over the vehicle to the defendant.
4. Plaintiff stated that the defendant agreed to repay the loan
amount in respect of said credit facility in 60 equal monthly
-- 2 of 7 --
3 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
installments of Rs.10,734/-. The defendant has hypothecated the
vehicle with the plaintiff bank. The defendant defaulted in payment of
the installment. The plaintiff called upon the defendant by its various
letters to pay the amount. The plaintiff issued Demand Notice to the
defendant dated 13.06.2017 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and called upon the defendant to pay
the amount of 5,48,347.44/- The defendant failed to pay the amount.
Hence the suit for recovery.
5. The defendant was duly served but he failed to appear therefore
as per roznama dated 14.02.2019, the suit proceeded ex-parte against
the defendant.
6. In view of pleading of the plaintiff, following points arise for my
determination and the reasons with finding thereon are as under :-
POINTS FINDING
1) Whether plaintiff proves that
they have sanctioned and
disbursed credit facility of Rs.
6,44,000/- to the defendant to
purchase car?
Proved
2) Whether plaintiff proves that
they are entitled for recovery of
Rs.5,50,810.28/- along with
interest at the rate of 12.65% per
annum?
Rs. 5,50,810.28/- along with
interest at the rate of 9%
p.a.
3) What order and decree? Suit is decreed with cost.
-- 3 of 7 --
4 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
R E A S O N S
7. Heard advocate Adv. Pratibha Mehta for the Plaintiff.
As to point nos. 1 to 3.
8. The plaintiff to prove the contents of the plaint, filed evidence
affidavit of Moreshwar Kashinath Jangale (Exh.4), Chief Manager of the
plaintiff’s branch authorised vide Power of Attorney (Exh.7) on behalf
of plaintiff bank. The contents of the affidavit is as per the plaint. The
witness deposed that the credit facility of Rs.6,44,000/- was sanctioned
to the defendant to purchase car. The amount of Rs.6,44,000/- was
directly paid to the dealer M/s. Ritu Automobiles Private Limtied The
defendant defaulted in payment of monthly installment, as agreed by
him. Therefore, notice was issued. He failed to pay the amount.
9. The plaintiff has relied on sanctioned letter dated
31.03.2016( Exh.8) i.e. Credit Facility–sanction letter whereby term
loan of Rs. 6.44 lakh is sanctioned with 60 monthly installments with
interest at the rate of 11.15% + 0.50 CGTMSE cover. The clause 3 of
terms and conditions shows that the loan amount will be released
directly in the name of Dealer/Seller by way of RTGS/DD. The plaintiff
has filed the receipts of the dealer at Exh.17 to show that they have
paid the amount of Rs.6,44,000/- directly to the dealer Ritu Automobile
Private Limited on 07.04.2016.
10. The defendant has executed following documents in favour of
the plaintiff bank for the car loan :-
i. Promissory note dated 31.03.2016 (Exh.10);
ii. Hypothecation of Vehicle agreement dated 31.03.2016
(Exh.11) wherein the defendant has hypothecated the vehicle
Hyundai Xcent with plaintiff bank. The defendant has agreed
-- 4 of 7 --
5 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
to pay the amount in 60 equal monthly installments;
iii. Letter of Guarantee dated 31.03.2016 (Exh.13);
iv. R.C. Book which shows that the vehicle is hypothecated
with plaintiff bank (Exh.19);
11. The plaintiff has relied on letter dated 12.07.2016 (Exh.20);
06.01.2017 (Exh.21); 17.02.2017 (Exh.22); 02.03.2017 (Exh.23);
13.06.2017 (Exh.24); 19.08.2107 (Exh.25) to show that these letters
were issued to the defendant to pay the balance amount of loan. The
plaintiff has relied on the statement of account Exhibit 26. It shows that
the defendant has paid Rs.1,42,792.56/- and Rs.64,181.36/- thereby
the defendant has paid amount of Rs.2,06,973.92/-. The last balance for
recovery Rs.5,51,655.28/-
12. The above oral and documentary evidence of plaintiff has
gone unchallenged. The defendant even after receipt of the Writ of
Summons failed to appear before the Court. The above evidence of the
plaintiff shows that the plaintiff has sanctioned term loan of
Rs.6,44,000/- for purchase of car Hyundai Xcent. The amount of
Rs.6,44,000/- is directly paid to the dealer M/s Ritu Automobiles
Private Limited. The defendant defaulted in payment of monthly
installments. Hence, plaintiff is entitled for recovery of
Rs.5,50,810.28/-. The amount of interest of 12.65% claimed is very
high, considering the present economic scenario. Therefore I hold that
the plaintiff is entitled for interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the
date of filling of the suit i.e. 24.06.2018. The credit facility was
sanctioned on 31.03.2016. The statement of account shows that the
defendant has paid the amount of installment lastly on 15.12.2017 prior
to filling of the suit. Therefore, the suit is within limitation. The plaintiff
is entitled to recover Rs. 5,50,810.28/- along with interest at the rate of
-- 5 of 7 --
6 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
9% per annum from the date of filling of the suit. Accordingly answer
point nos. 1 to 3 and pass the following order:-
ORDER
1. The suit is decreed with cost.
2. The defendant is directed to pay amount of
Rs.5,50,810.28/- (Rs. Five Lakh Fifty Thousand
Eight Hundred Ten and Paise Twenty Eight only) to
the plaintiff along with interest at the rate of 9%
per annum from the date of filling of the suit i.e.
24.06.2018 till its realization.
3. Decree be drawn accordingly.
Dated : 06.03.2021 (Smt. S.S. Nagur)
Judge,
City Civil Court
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 06.03.2021
Transcribed on : 06.03.2021
Checked & Sign on : 06.03.2021
-- 6 of 7 --
7 Judgment in S.C.Suit No. 1952 of 2018
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
06/03/2021 4.45 p.m. Prachi Y. Potdar
Stenographer – Grade I
Name of the Judge HHJ Smt. S.S. Nagur
(C.R.NO.13)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
06/03/2021
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 06/03/2021
Judgment/order uploaded on 06/03/2021
-- 7 of 7 --