Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010103622019
Presented on : 09-10-2019
Registered on: 17-12-2019
Decided on : 01-08-2022
Duration : 02 Y :09 M :23D
EXHIBIT-08
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 981 OF 2021
Santosh Nagurao Gadge
Age 27 Yrs., of Mumbai an adult
Indian inhabitant having his address
at Room No.4, N.M. Gadge Chawl,
Makadwala Compound, Jai Shankar
Chowk, HalavPool Road, Kurla (W),
Mumbai-400 070.
...Plaintiff
Versus
Deepak Yashwant Kadam
Age 45 years Mumbai, an adult
Indian inhabitant, working for gain
with Industrial Training Institute,
Kurla Govandi, Kirol Road, Vidya
Vihar, West, Mumbai-400 086 and
residing at Building No.4, Room
No.665, Government Colony, Opposite
to Kherwadi Police Chowki, Bandra
East, Mumbai-400 051.
...Defendant
-- 1 of 6 --
2
Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.981/2021
Appearance :
Ld. Advocate Mr. Balbheem Patil for plaintiff.
None for defendant (Exparte).
CORAM : HHJ DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR
C. R. NO. : 61
DATE : 01/08/2022
Judgment
This is the suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-
along with interest from the date of decree to be passed by this Court.
Plaintiff’s case-
2. Plaintiff is a businessman. The defendant happens to be a
friend of the plaintiff and he had borrowed a friendly loan of
Rs.4,00,000/- from the plaintiff on 20.10.2017 without any interest.
Against the said payment, defendant issued promissory note of
Rs.4,00,000/- in favour of the plaintiff on the same day (‘said
promissory note’). Defendant had promised to return the said amount
on demand.
3. Plaintiff requested the defendant to pay the amount of the
said promissory note, however same was dishonoured. Plaintiff,
therefore, issued a demand notice dated 07.05.2018 and called upon
defendant to pay the amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs. In spite of receipt of the
notice, defendant failed to pay the amount. Hence, the present suit.
4. Defendant was duly served, however, he remained absent.
Therefore, suit proceeded
ex-parte.
5. So as to prove the claim, plaintiff has filed claim affidavit at
-- 2 of 6 --
3
Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.981/2021
Exhibit-02 and has reiterated his contention as to the transaction of
hand loan and issuance of subject promissory note by defendant in his
favour. He further claims that he is entitlement to recover Rs.4,00,000/-
from the defendant. In support of his claim plaintiff has placed on
record the original demand promissory note at Exhibit-04, the copy of
demand notice dated 07.05.2018 and its postal receipts and
acknowledgments are at Exhibit-05 collectively. Plaintiff has also filed
the photocopy of identity card of the defendant and photocopy of pay-
slip and light bill of the defendant so as to show the correctness of
address of defendant. Plaintiff has also filed copy of money lending
license issued in his favour alongwith list of documents at Exhibit-06.
6. So as to decide the present suit, following points arise for my
consideration. I have recorded my findings along with reasons on the
said point as under :-
Sr. No. Points Findings
1. Whether plaintiff is entitled to
recover an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-
from defendant?
If yes, at what rate interest?
Plaintiff is entitled to
recover an amount of
Rs.4,00,000/-from the
defendant along with
interest @ 06% p.a.
from the defendant
from the date of decree.
2. What order and decree? Suit is partly decreed as
per final order.
REASONS
As to Point No. 1-
7. This being a suit for recovery of an amount, it is imperative to
examine whether the plaintiff has placed on record the requisite
-- 3 of 6 --
4
Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.981/2021
evidence to prove his entitlement. As noted above, plaintiff has filed
demand promissory note dated 20/10/2017 which reveals that the
plaintiff had lent an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the defendant as a
hand-loan without any interest. The said demand note bears signature
as well as thumb impression of defendant. The plaintiff has averred that
the said promissory note was issued by the defendant against the
receipt of hand-loan of Rs.4,00,000/- from the plaintiff. This contention
of plaintiff on oath has gone unchallenged. Thus, the fact of giving
friendly loan of Rs.4,00,000/- as claimed by the plaintiff in his claim
affidavit is duly supported by the documents placed on record. As there
is no
contra evidence on record, the said fact needs to be accepted as
proved. Hence, I hold that the plaintiff had given hand-loan amount of
Rs.4,00,000/- to the defendant.
8. Plaintiff has also placed on record the copy of the demand
notice, which reveals that the plaintiff had demanded the amount
against the subject promissory note. Plaintiff on oath contends that
amount due is not paid. This contention being unchallenged deserves to
be accepted. Plaintiff has also produced on record his money lending
licence and copy of demand notice dated 07.05.2018. said money
lending licence is of no use, as the plaintiff has not contended about
lending of amount to plaintiff on interest. However the subject
promissory note and the copy of the demand notice boosts the oral
evidence of the plaintiff as to liability of the defendant. Hence I hold
that that plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from
the defendant.
9. So far as claim of interest is concerned, plaintiff has claimed
interest from the date of decree. As the transaction between the plaintiff
-- 4 of 6 --
5
Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.981/2021
and defendant was purely a hand-loan without any interest, I find that
the interest at the rate of 06%.p.a. from the date of decree till its
realization would serve ends of justice. The grant of said interest would
be in consonance with section 34 of the CPC. Hence, I answer point
No.1 in affirmative.
As to Point No. 2-
10. From the findings recorded to the point No.1, it is clear that
plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from the
defendant along with interest at the rate of 06% per annum from the
date of decree till its full realization. Hence, in answer to point No.2, I
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1) Summary Suit No.981 of 2021 is hereby partly decreed with
costs.
2) Defendant do pay an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees Four
Lakhs Only) to the plaintiff along with interest at the rate of
06% per annum from the date of judgment and decree dated
01/08/2022 till its full realization.
3) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
4) Plaintiff is entitled for refund of Court fees, as per rules.
Date- 01/08/2022. (Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Court Room No.61
Dictated on : 01/08/2022
Checked on : 01/08/2022
Signed on : 01/08/2022
-- 5 of 6 --
6
Exparte Judg.in Sum SU No.981/2021
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
05/08/2022 Mrs. Vidya V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Dr. S.D. Tawshikar
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
01/08/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 01/08/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 05/08/2022
-- 6 of 6 --