Bangalore District Court
The Federal Bank Ltd vs H.S.Chandrashekar on 14 October, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE XLI ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE
AT BANGALORE [CCH.No.42]
PRESENT:
SRI. KASANAPPA NAIK. M.A., LL.M.
XLI Addl. City Civil Judge
Dated this the 14th day of October 2019
O.S.No.4860/2019
PLAINTIFF : The Federal Bank Ltd.
Registered Office at:
Aluva, Kerala-683 101
Represented by its Senior Manager
The Federal bank Ltd.
Sadashiva Nagar Branch,
No.88, "Keerthi"
2nd Main Road, Palace Guttahalli
Bengaluru-560 003.
(By Sri.Vijaykumar, Advocate)
V/s.
DEFENDANTS : H.S.Chandrashekar
Proprietor of M/s G.S.Traders
R/at No.275, 60 Feet Road
Left Side, Vinobanagara
Shimoga
Karnataka-577 204.
And also at:
F 10 C/o Chennappa
Near Subramanya Store
APMC Yard, Shimoga
Shimoga, Karnataka-577 203
-2- OS.4860/2019
And also at:
M/s G.S.Traders
Door No.218, 8th D Main
HRBR Layout, 1st Block
Bengaluru-560 043.
(Ex-parte )
Date of Institution of the Suit: 05.07.2019
Nature of the suit
(Suit on Pronote, suit for Money Suit
declaration & possession, suit
for injunction)
Date of commencement of 25.09.2019
recording of evidence:
Date on which the Judgment 14.10.2019
was pronounced:
Total Duration: Year/s Month/s Day/s
00 03 09
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff bank has filed this suit for the recovery of an amount of Rs.3,71,821.59/- from the defendant with future interest at 20.50% per annum with monthly rests together with over due interest at 2% p.a. in respect of TOD from the date of suit till realization, to pay contingent charges, to award costs and to pass such other reliefs.
-3- OS.4860/2019
2. The facts of the case are as under:
The plaintiff is a Banking Company within the purview of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and having registered office at Kerala and one of the branch at Sadashiva Nagar, Bengaluru. On the request of defendant, the plaintiff bank has sanctioned a Temporary Overdraft Facility of Rs.2,88,000/- on 30.4.2018 for short term business needs. In consideration of the availment of loan, the defendant has executed an on-demand-promissory note along with security delivery letter and agreed to pay interest at 20.50% p.a. with monthly rests and over due interest at the rate of 2% p.a. in case of default or such other varied rates of interest as per the RBI guidelines.
It is alleged that the defendant has been extremely irregular, not only in the operation of the temporary overdraft facility, but also in the matter of repayment as per the agreed terms and failed to comply with the agreed conditions of the TOD, inspite of various requests and reminders by the plaintiff bank. When the defendant failed
-4- OS.4860/2019 to discharge temporary overdraft facility, the cause of action arose and suit is filed for the relief mentioned above.
3. The suit summons was served upon the son of the defendant, which was held sufficient, but he failed to appear and came to be placed exparte.
4. In support of its case, the plaintiff bank examined its Senior Manager as PW1 and produced 12 documents in evidence at Ex.P.1 to P.12.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the materials on record.
6. On the basis of the above materials, the following points arise for my consideration:
(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant is in due of 3,71,821.59 along with interest at the rate of 20.50% p.a. with monthly
-5- OS.4860/2019 rests from the date of suit till realization?
2) Whether the plaintiff bank is entitle for the relief sought for?
3) What decree or order?
7. My findings to the above points are as under:
POINT No.1 & 2 - In the Affirmative, POINT No.3 - As per the final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. POINT Nos.1 AND 2: The learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff has proved its case with the help of oral and documentary evidence and established that the defendant has availed overdraft facility from plaintiff bank and failed to repay the same, despite issue of reminders. It is argued that the plaintiff has produced oral and documentary evidence to support its plaint claim and allegations and that the defendant, though
-6- OS.4860/2019 served summons, failed to appear. It is argued that the plaintiff having established its suit claim, the suit has to be decreed.
9. On careful perusal of materials on record reveal that the Senior Manager of plaintiff bank - Mrs.Priyanka.V.S. W/o Vijay M.Sinde has filed her affidavit evidence narrating all the material facts of the plaint. The plaintiff bank produced documents in support of its case. Ex.P.1 is current account opening form, Ex.P.2 is letter of defendant dated 21.4.2018 requesting the plaintiff bank to sanction TOD facility of Rs.5,00,000/-, Ex.P.3 is on- demand-promissory note dated 30.4.2018 executed by defendant, Ex.P.4 is Security delivery letter dated 30.4.2018, Ex.P.5 to 9 are letters issued by plaintiff bank on various dates calling upon the defendant to pay the amount due and to regularize his account, Ex.P.10 is postal cover along with acknowledgment bearing address of the defendant, Ex.P.11 is statement of account, which
-7- OS.4860/2019 discloses that the defendant is liable to pay balance of Rs.3,71,821/- as on 5.7.2019 and Ex.P.12 is Certificate under Section 2(8)(b) r/w Section 2A of Bankers Book Evidence Act.
10. The above said oral evidence coupled with documents clearly reveal that the defendant has availed TOD and failed to repay the same despite of issue of several reminders. The defendant though served with the suit summons, failed to appear before the court and contest the suit. This itself goes to show that the defendant is not disputing about the suit claim of the plaintiff bank and plaint allegations. The plaint averments, evidence of the plaintiff and documents corroborated with each other and there is no material to disbelieve or doubt the claim and allegations of the plaintiff bank. Thus, suit has to be decreed. Hence, Point Nos.1 and 2 are answered in the affirmative.
-8- OS.4860/2019
11. POINT No.3:- In view of my findings on Point
No.1 and 2 in the Affirmative, the suit filed by the plaintiff bank has to be decreed with costs. In the result, I proceed to pass the following :
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs.
The defendant is liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,71,821.59/- to the plaintiff bank with interest at 20.50% per annum from the date of suit till realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the judgment writer directly on the computer, thereof, is corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 14th day of October 2019).
( KASANAPPA NAIK )
XLI ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE
BANGALORE
-9- OS.4860/2019
ANNEXURE
I. List of witnesses examined on behalf of :
a) Plaintiff's side:
P.W.1 Priyanka
b) Defendants' side: NIL.
II. List of documents exhibited on behalf of :
a) Plaintiff's side:
Ex.P.1 Current opening Form
Ex.P.2 Letter of defendant dated 21.4.2018
Ex.P.3 Demand promissory note dated
30.4.2018
Ex.P.4 Security delivery letter
Ex.P.5 to 9 Letters issued by plaintiff bank
Ex.P.10 Postal cover along with
acknowledgment
Ex.P.11 Statement of account
Ex.P.12 Certificate under Section 2(8(b) r/w
Section 2A of Bankers Book Evidence Act
b)Defendant's side : NIL XLI ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE BANGALORE
- 10 - OS.4860/2019
- 11 - OS.4860/2019