Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: 1 Comm. Suit No.223/2019
MHCC010109352019 Presented on : 23/10/2019
Registered on : 26/11/2019
Decided on : 18/02/2023
Duration : 03Y/02M/23D
Exh.29
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
(Court Room No.32)
COMMERCIAL SUIT No.223 of 2019
Canara Bank, a body corporate constituted
and functioning under the Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of
Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Head
Office at 112, J.C. Road, Banglore
Karnataka State and having one of their
Branch office at 167, Navyug Niwas, Opp.
Minerva Cinema, Lamington Road,
Mumbai400007.
…PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
M/s. Laiqa Enterprises,
a proprietary concern through its Proprietor
Mr. Mohsin Ahmed Khan, Age 36 years,
Indian inhabitant, residing at 127/2,
Badrunisha Building, Wasil Khan Marg,
Surti Mohalla, Two Tank, Mumbai 400008 ...DEFENDANT
Smt. Sujata Dahigaonkar i/b. Sandhya Nanavare, learned
Advocates for plaintiff.
Defendant : Exparte.
CORAM : JUDGE SHRI. N.P. TRIBHUWAN
E XP A R T E J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 18/02/2023)
This is a suit for recovery of sum of Rs.3,43,295/ together
with interest @ 10.75 % p.a. compounded monthly from the date of suit
till realization of amount.
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Comm. Suit No.223/2019
2] Plaintiff is nationalized bank, a body corporate constituted
and functioning under the provisions of the Banking Companies
(Acquisition and Transfers of Undertakings) Act, 1970. Plaintiff – bank
was formerly known as Syndicate Bank, which amalgamated to Canara
Bank on 4/3/2020. Defendant approached the plaintiff and applied for
term loan of Rs.4,91,000/ for purchasing vehicle. On 5/2/2016
plaintiff has sanctioned term loan of Rs4,91,000/ with interest @
10.95% p.a. to the defendant. The said loan was repayable in 60 equal
monthly installments of Rs.10,880/ each. At the time of sanctioning
loan plaintiff has executed documents in favour of plaintiff i.e. loan
application, composite hypothecation agreement dtd.5/2/2016, receipt
dtd.5/2/2016, authority letter to debit monthly installments.
3] Defendant was irregular in repayment of loan installments.
Hence, account of defendant was treated as NonPerforming Assets on
30/06/2018. Despite repeated demands he failed to regularize the
account. Hence, plaintiff has issued demand notice to defendant on
13/02/2019 but defendant failed to pay the outstanding dues. As per
statement of account as on 21/10/2019 defendant was in outstanding
of loan of Rs.3,43,295/ together with interest @ 10.75% p.a. with
monthly rest. Thus, defendant is liable to pay outstanding principal sum
of Rs.2,49,485/ + interest @ 10.75% p.a. amounting to Rs.93,810/
compounded monthly. Hence, this suit.
4] Defendant served with suit summons as per service
affidavit Exh.13 & 14 but defendant did not appear. Hence, suit
proceeded exparte against him.
5] On above facts following points arise for determination and
this court and recorded findings thereon for the reasons stated as under.
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Comm. Suit No.223/2019
POINTS FINDINGS
1. Does plaintiff prove that it has advanced
term loan of Rs.4,91,000/ to defendant ? …Yes
2. Does plaintiff prove that defendant is in
outstanding dues of Rs.3,43,295/? …Yes
3. Whether plaintiff is entitled for relief
claimed?
...Yes.
4. What order and decree? ...As per final
order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT Nos.1 to 3 :
6] Heard learned counsel of Plaintiff. Plaintiff has examined
its Manager (PW1 Pramod Ramdas Adsul) to prove its case. He
reproduced all content of plaint in his chiefexamination. His evidence
is supported by documentary evidence (Exh.17 to 27) : Application for
credit facilities, Letter of Sanction, Receipt, Composite Hypothecation
Agreement, Confirmation of Delivery of Machinery/vehicle, letter of
undertaking, particulars of assents and liability, addendum to
agreement, Letter of Authority to debit monthly installments, Legal
Notice, Statement of Account, Particulars of Claim.
7] In view of evidence of PW1 Manager of plaintiffBank and
documentary evidence, it becomes clear that on the request of
defendant on 5/2/2016 plaintiff has sanctioned him term loan of
Rs.4,91,000/ for purchasing vehicle. At the time of sanctioning the said
loan defendant has executed Hypothecation agreement and above
documents in favour of plaintiff. Statement of account and particulars
of claim (Exh.26 & 27) shows that as on 10/3/2020 defendant was in
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Comm. Suit No.223/2019
outstanding principal sum of Rs.2,49,485/ + interest of Rs.93,810/
(Total Rs.3,43,295/).
8] Evidence of PW1 remained unchallenged. His evidence is
supported by documentary evidence mentioned in para supra. There is
no reason to disbelieve his testimony. Hence, plaintiff succeed to prove
that it has advanced above mentioned term loan to defendant with
conditions. The principal sum of Rs.2,49,485/ + interest of
Rs.93,810/ (Total Rs.3,43,295/) is due and payable by defendant with
interest @ 10.75% p.a. compounded monthly. Therefore, plaintiff is
entitled for the recovery of the same. Hence, I answered point Nos.1 to
3 as above. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. The defendant is directed to pay to plaintiff the amount
of Rs.3,43,295/ and interest @ 10.75% p.a.
compounded monthly on principal sum of Rs.2,49,485/
from the date of suit till realization of the said amount.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
Date : 18/2/2023.
(N.P. Tribhuwan)
Judge, City Civil Court,
Mumbai. C.R.No.32
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Comm. Suit No.223/2019
Dictated on : 18/02/2023
Checked on : 18/02/2023
Signed on : 18/02/2023
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
18/02/2023 Mrs.Rupali S. Bhor
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge(with CR No.) HHJ SHRI. N. P. TRIBHUVAN
(C.R.No.32)
Date of pronouncement of Order 18/02/2023
Order signed by P.O. on 18/02/2023
Order uploaded on 18/02/2023
-- 5 of 5 --