Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: ..1.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
,MHCC010073912018 Presented on : 20/06/2018
Registered on : 01/04/2019
Decided on : 03/10/2023
Duration : 05Y 03M 14D
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
EXHIBIT NO.16
S. C. SUIT NO.923 OF 2019
CANARA BANK,
A body Corporate Constituted under the
Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer
of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head
Office at 112, J. C. Road, Bangalore – 560 002,
and one of its Branch Office amongst others
known as Mazagaon Branch having address at
All Saints Home Building, 54 A, Dockyard Road,
Ekta Nagar, Mazagaon, Mumbai – 400 010, in the
State of Maharashtra, represented by Mr. Nishant
Sinha, Officer.
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
] ..PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
1. M/s. Walkar Tours and Travels
(Proprietor Mr. Rupesh Pradeep Walkar)
106/53-A, Ground Floor, Anand Nagar,
Dr. E. Moses Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018.
]
]
]
]
2. Mr. Rupesh Pradeep Walker,
(Proprietor of M/s. Walker Tours and Travels)
106/53-A, Ground Floor, Anand Nagar,
Dr. E. Moses Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018.
]
]
]
] ..DEFENDANTS
Appearance :-
Learned Adv. Manisha Vishwakarma for plaintiff.
None for defendants.
(Ex-parte)
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHAIKH AKBAR SHAIKH JAFAR
COURT ROOM NO.15.
DATE : 03/10/2023
-- 1 of 6 --
..2.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
J U D G M E N T
1 Instant suit is filed for recovery of amount. The plaintiff
bank has come with the case that plaintiff bank is a corporate body
constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of
Undertakings) Act, 1970, and having its Head Office at 112, J. C. Road,
Bangalore – 560 002, and one of its Branch Office known as Canara
Bank, Mazagaon Branch having address at All Saints Home Building, 54
A, Dockyard Road, Ekta Nagar, Mazagaon, Mumbai – 400 010. The
plaintiff is carrying on business of bankers. Defendant No.1 is a
proprietorship firm and defendant No.2 is the proprietor of the same.
2 The defendant No.1 through defendant No.2 approached
the plaintiff bank for term loan on 18/06/2015 for purchasing Nissan
Sunny XLD 5 car under Loans to Micro & Small Enterprises scheme.
The plaintiff bank sanctioned the loan of Rs.9,40,000/- on 18/06/2015
for purchase of car, upon agreeing with the terms and conditions of the
bank by the defendants. It is further contended by the plaintiff bank
that the defendants agreed to repay the said loan in 60 months
commencing from 2 months after the date of first disbursement. In
consequence of sanction of loan, the defendants have executed
following documents :-
(i) Letter of undertaking re: Loans/Advances on Form NF
721/1L(25)2011-03/CREA dated 24/06/2015.
(ii) DEED OF HYPOTHECATION RE: VEHICLE on Form NF
722/1L(25)/11-2012/SKP dated 24/06/2015.
3 It is further contended by the plaintiff that the said loan
was disbursed to the defendants, but they failed and neglected to repay
-- 2 of 6 --
..3.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
the same. Thereafter, plaintiff issued notice on 12/06/2018 calling upon
the defendants to pay the overdue amount outstanding. It is further
contended that the amount of Rs.7,36,507.70/- became due and
recoverable against defendants, jointly and severally as on 06/05/2018.
4 The summons were served upon the defendants, but they
remained absent, therefore, as per
roznama dated 11/03/2020, suit
proceeded ex-parte against the defendants.
5 Having regard to the contentions of plaintiff, following
points arise for my determination and I have recorded my findings
thereon for the reasons thereunder :-
POINTS FINDINGS
1 Does the plaintiff prove that it advanced
loan to the defendants of Rs.9,40,000/- ?
Affirmative
2 Does the plaintiff prove that the
defendants failed to repay the loan as
agreed ?
Affirmative
3 Does the plaintiff prove that it is entitled
to charge interest as prayed for ?
Affirmative
4 Is the plaintiff entitled for the reliefs
sought ?
Affirmative
5 What order ? As per final order.
REASONS
6 In order to substantiate the contentions, the authorised
person of plaintiff entered the witness box and relied upon various
documents (Exhibit-10 to 14) under list (Exhibit-06). Heard learned
advocate for plaintiff.
-- 3 of 6 --
..4.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
As to point Nos.1 to 3 :-
7 The evidence of authorised person of plaintiff remain
unchallenged. The record discloses that the defendants have executed
the loan document in favour of the bank, availed the loan facility, but
failed to repay as agreed. The Statement of Account shows that the
defendants have paid an amount of Rs.5,812/- on 06/05/2018,
thereafter, failed to repay the installments towards loan and as per the
record of bank as on 06/05/2018, the amount of Rs.7,36,507.70/-
became due and recoverable. The default of the defendants shows that
they have deliberately avoided to pay the loan amount, thus, the
plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of the same. Hence, I am of the
view that the plaintiff bank is entitled for interest at the rate of 9.70%
per annum from the date of default i.e. 06/05/2018, till realisation of
entire due amount i.e. Rs.7,36,507.70/-.
8 The defendants remained absent though served, matter
proceeded ex-parte which is sufficient to draw an inference that the
defendants have not repaid the due amount and committed default. The
plaintiff bank having business of banking is based on the public fund,
therefore, the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the due amount from
the defendants as prayed for. In view of above discussions, I answer
point No.1 to 3 in affirmative.
9 In view of my finding to point Nos.1 to 3. It is established
that the plaintiff is entitled to recover due loan amount alongwith
interest at 9.70% per annum. As the plaintiff bank is made constrained
to file the suit for recovery of loan amount, therefore, defendants are
liable to pay the costs of suit. In the result, I answer point No.4
accordingly and proceed to pass the following order :-
-- 4 of 6 --
..5.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
ORDER
1. S. C. Suit No.923/2019 is hereby decreed with costs.
2. Plaintiff do recover an amount of Rs.7,36,507.70/-
from the defendants with further interest at the rate of
9.70% per annum from 06/05/2018, till the recovery
of entire amount.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(Judgment dictated and pronounced in open Court)
(Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar)
Judge,
City Civil Court, Greater Bombay
Dated : 03/10/2023 C.R. No.15
Directly typed on : 03/10/2023
Draft corrected on : 04/10/2023
Signed on : 04/10/2023
-- 5 of 6 --
..6.. S.C. Suit No.923/2019
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
05/10/2023 (Ms. Sonali Sawant)
at about 03.10 p.m. Stenographer (Grade-III)
Name of the Hon'ble Judge : Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar,
Judge, City Civil Court and
Addl. Sessions Judge
Court Room No.15, Gr. Mumbai
Date of pronouncement of Order : 03/10/2023
Order signed by Hon'ble Judge on : 04/10/2023
Order uploaded on : 05/10/2023
at about 03.10 p.m.
-- 6 of 6 --