Delhi District Court
Unknown vs Sh. Parveen Kumar on 4 May, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIL KUMAR SISODIA: SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGECUMRENT CONTROLLER (NORTH EAST DISTRICT):
KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI.
CIVIL SUIT NO. 325 OF 2010
(UNIQUE I. D. NO.02402C0334392010)
CANARA BANK
(A Body corporate, Incorporated under
Banking Companies (Acquisition and
Transfer of Undertakings) Act 5 of 1970
having its Head Office at 112, J.C. Road,
Bangalore and amongst others a branch
at Rohtash Nagar, Delhi110 032. ........... PLAINTIFF
Versus
SH. PARVEEN KUMAR
R/o 1/11043, Gali No.8,
Subhash Park, Naveen Shahdara,
Delhi110032. .......... DEFENDANT
Date of institution : 30.11.2010
Order reserved on : 04.05.2012
Date of Decision : 04.05.2012
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF Rs.90,000/
EX.PARTE JUDGMENT :
1.The plaintiff bank has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.90,000/ against the defendant along with interest & costs.
Suit No.325/10 Page : 1/5
2. The facts of the case, in nutshell, are that plaintiff bank is a body corporate engaged in the business of banking. The defendant was maintaining a saving bank account no. SB 1795.101.42400 with the plaintiff bank since 23.01.2009. The defendant was availing various customer services and facilities such as cheque book, temporary overdraft against the cheque etc. In January 2009, the defendant had deposited a cheque bearing no. 608843 dated 21.01.2009 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/ in his favour with the plaintiff bank and had requested for temporary overdraft against the said cheque. The said cheque was sent for clearance by the plaintiff bank on 24.01.2009. The credit of said cheque was entered in his saving account by the plaintiff bank on 24.01.2009 and the same was duly shown in his Statement of Account since the next date i.e. 25.01.2009. The defendant withdrew the aforesaid amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs from his saving bank account on 29.01.2009 and 30.01.2009 vide two cheques amounting to Rs.3.90 Lacs and Rs.10,000/. The cheque deposited by the defendant was returned dishonoured by Indian Overseas Bank on account of insufficient funds in the second week of February 2009 and accordingly, the amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs had become overdue and outstanding against the defendant. The plaintiff bank Suit No.325/10 Page : 2/5 requested the defendant to clear the outstanding dues. The defendant had deposited Rs.3.40 Lacs with the plaintiff bank from February 2009 till July 2009 and failed to deposit the balance amount of Rs.60,000/ despite repeated demands by the plaintiff bank. Thereafter, the plaintiff bank issued a legal notice dated 20.10.2010 but the same was not complied by the defendant. The defendant is thus liable to pay the amount of Rs.60,000/ alongwith interest @ 16.5% p.a. Compounded monthly. Finding no other alternative, the present suit was filed by the plaintiff.
3. The summons of the suit were served upon the defendants on 14.12.2010 through his wife but the defendant failed to appear and contest the suit and accordingly he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 09.02.2011.
4. Thereafter, the plaintiff was directed to lead evidence in support of its case. The plaintiff has examined PW1 Sh. Sunil Arora, Officer of the plaintiff bank who tendered his affidavit EX.PW 1/A wherein he reiterated the facts stated in the plaint. PW1 also proved on record the account opening form dated 23.01.2009 as Ex.PW1/1; specimen signatures card bearing signatures of defendant alongwith his photograph as Ex.PW1/2; copies of Suit No.325/10 Page : 3/5 PAN card and election card were marked as MarkA1 and A2; original cheque dated 21.01.2009 as Ex.PW1/3; two original cheques dated 29.01.2009 and 30.01.2009 as Ex.PW1/4 and PW 1/5; credit slips dated 20.04.2009 and 18.02.2009, payment slip dated 24.02.2009 as Exs.PW1/6 to PW1/8; legal notice dated 20.10.2010 as Ex.PW1/9; postal receipt as Ex.PW1/10; certified statement of account as Ex.PW1/11 (Colly.); copy of GPA dated 12.04.2005 as Ex.PW1/12 and closed the plaintiff's evidence.
5. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and have perused the record carefully.
6. The testimony of PW1 has remained unrebutted and unchallenged and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. The plaintiff bank has proved that the defendants had availed the temporary overdraft facility against cheque Ex.PW1/3 which was dishonoured on its presentation. The plaintiff has also proved that the defendant withdrew the amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs vide cheques Ex.PW1/4 and PW1/5 respectively. The plaintiff has also proved the statement of account Ex.PW1/11 which shows that a sum of Rs.90,000/ was due and outstanding against the defendant as on 31.7.2010 which the defendant has failed to pay. The plaintiff has Suit No.325/10 Page : 4/5 proved the legal demand notice to the defendant as Ex.PW1/9 and postal receipt as Ex.PW1/10. In view of the testimony of PW1 as well as the documents proved by the plaintiff the plaintiff has established its case against the defendant.
7. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the sum of Rs.90,000/. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to simple interest on the aforesaid amount @ 16.5% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realization. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to the costs of the suit. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court
Dated : 4th May, 2012 (ANIL KUMAR SISODIA)
SCJCUMRC (NE)
KARKARDOOMA COURTS
DELHI.
Suit No.325/10 Page : 5/5