Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010073532018 Presented on : 20-06-2018
Registered on : 01-08-2018
Decided on : 14-10-2021
Duration : Y M D
03 02 13
BEFORE THE CITY CIVIL COURT, MUMBAI
( Court No.14 )
(Presided Over by Sunil U. Hake)
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.924 OF 2021
(S.C. SUIT NO.1956 OF 2018)
Ex.21
CANARA BANK, a Banking Company, }
Constituted and functioning under the }
provisions of the Banking Companies }
[Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings }
Act, 1970, having their Central Office at }
Bangaluru, Pin 560 002, an, Karnataka }
State and a Branch Office at All saints }
Home Building 54A dockyard road, }
Mazgaon Mumbai, 400 010 }
The suit is filed by Mr.Nishant }
Purushottam Kumar Sinha }
Probationary Officer & Power of Attorney }
Holder } ..Plaintiff
V E R S U S
Mr. Subhash Laxmanrao Borkhade,Adult }
PropM/s. Mityash Tours & Travels }
B8, Room No.204, Sector9, Gharonda }
Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai400 701 } ..Defendant
__________________________________________________________
Ld. Advocate Jytosna Putran for plaintiff.
Defendant Exparte._______________________________________
-- 1 of 5 --
2
JUDGMENT
(Dated this 14th day of October, 2021)
1. Suit is for recovery of an amount of Rs.8,29,330/
with interest @ 11.70% p.a.
2. Briefly stated, plaintiff's case, is as under:
Plaintiff is a banking institution. Defendant is the
proprietor of a proprietory firmM/s. Mityash Tours & Travels.
Defendant approached plaintiff bank for term loan of Rs.9.29 lacs
by making an application to purchase a Nissan Sunny XLD 5
seater Car. Defendant made application for advancement of loan
on 20/07/2015. The plaintiff bank sanctioned loan of Rs. 9.29
lacs to defendant. The loan was to be repaid in 60 monthly
installments of Rs.20345/. Defendant also executed necessary
documents such as Letter of Undertaking and Hypothecation of
vehicle. However, defendant failed to make regular repayment of
monthly installments. Therefore, plaintiff bank send notice dated
23/05/2018 through advocate calling upon the defendant to pay
the outstanding amount. Inspite of service of notice, defendant
failed to make the payment. Vehicle was hypothicated with
plaintiff. Therefore, plaintiff seized the vehicle and sold it in
auction on 06/06/2018 for an amount of Rs. 2,26,000/. After
crediting said amount in the account of defendant, an amount of
Rs.8,29,330/ is due against defendant. Hence, this suit.
3. As per Service Affidavit Ex.4, Suit summons were
deemed to be served to defendant. But, he failed to tender his
appearance. Therefore, suit proceeded exparte against defendant.
-- 2 of 5 --
3
4. Following points arise for determination, findings
thereon for the reasons to follow are as under:
Sr.No. Points Findings
1. Does the plaintiff prove that an
amount of Rs.8,29,330/ is
outstanding against the
defendant?
Proved
2. What order? Suit is decreed as per
final order.
REASONS
Point No.1
5. In order to substantiate the claim, plaintiff bank filed
evidence affidavit of it's officer PW1 Pramod Kumar Singh
(Exh.5). He reiterated all the facts pleaded in the plaint and
testified that loan amount of Rs. 9.29 lacs was disbursed to the
defendant. Defendant executed documents such as letter of
undertaking (Ex.12), Hypothecation deed(Ex.13) and Letter of
evidencing execution of documents(Ex.14). Defendant failed to
repay the amount.
6. The oral evidence adduced by plaintiff bank is well
supported by the documents filed on record. The documents show
that loan amount of Rs.9.29 lacs was disbursed to the defendant.
Defendant was required to repay the loan amount in 60 monthly
installments. But, the statement of account (Ex.18) shows that
defendant failed to make regular repayment of the loan amount
and an amount of Rs.8,29,330/ was due as on 15/06/2018.
-- 3 of 5 --
4
7. As discussed supra, the defendant failed to contest
the suit and therefore the evidence adduced by the plaintiff bank
remain unchallenged. From the plaintiff's evidence, it is proved
that an amount of Rs.8,29,330/ is outstanding against the
defendant. Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to get decree for the
said amount. Plaintiff bank claimed interest at the rate of 9.70%
p.a. plus 2% p.a.overdue interest. The loan application letter
(Ex.09) and sanction order(Ex.11) show the agreed rate of
interest as 10.55% p.a. Plaintiff is entitled to get 2% penal interest
as per the terms of the agreement as defendant failed to repay the
amount. Plaintiff claimed interest at the rate of 9.70% p.a. as per
base rate. Thus, plaintiff is entitled to the interest at the rate of
11.70% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till it's realization.
Point No.1 is answered accordingly. In the result, following
order:
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant shall pay an amount of Rs.8,29,330/ (Rs.
Eight Lacs, Twenty Nine Thousand, Three Hundred and
Thirty only) with interest @ 11.70 percent p.a. to
plaintiff from the date of the suit till it's realization
within two months.
3. Court fees be refunded as per (E) Rules framed under
Section 11(2) of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948,
for the refund of Institution Fee.
4. Decree thus follow.
14/10/2021 SUNIL U.HAKE
JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR.MUMBAI.
-- 4 of 5 --
5
Dictated on : 14/10/2021
Transcribed on : 14/10/2021
Signed on : 14/10/2021
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
14/10/21 at 05.30 pm.
Mrs.Tanushree C.Kamble
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI SU Hake
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
14/10/21
Judgment and order signed by P.O. 14/10/21
Judgment/order uploaded on 14/10/21
-- 5 of 5 --