Bangalore District Court
Bank Of India vs Mr.R.Kalaivannan on 2 July, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF THE XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BANGALORE CITY - CCH NO.23.
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JULY, 2018.
PRESIDING OFFICER
PRESENT : Sri.Sadananda M.Doddamani,
B.A., L.LB.,
XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE.
O.S.No.8403/2016
PLAINTIFF/S: Bank of India,
A body corporate constituted under
the Banking Companies Acquisition
and Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
1970 having its Head Office
at Star house, Plot No.C-5,
G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex,
Bandra (E),
Mumbai - 400 051 &
branch amongst other places at
No. 1655, Jeevanbhimanagar
branch, HAL III Stage, Bangalore.
Represented by its constituted
Attorney Ashok Venkatesh Padiyar,
S/o Venkatesh Padiyar,
Aged about 53 years,
(By Sri.VSSS, Advocate)
Vs.
2
DEFENDANT/S: Mr.R.Kalaivannan,
Aged about 50 years,
S/o Ramadass,
Residing at No.357,
11th cross, M.V.Garden,
Halasuru, Bangalore - 560 008.
(Exparte)
*****
Date of institution of suit : 09.12.2016
Nature of suit : Money suit
Date of commencement
of recording of evidence : 01.06.2018
Date on which the judgment
was pronounded : 02.07.2018
Duration of the suit :Year/s Month/s Day/s
01 06 23
JUDGMENT
1. This is a suit filed by the plaintiff bank against the defendant for recovery of money.
3
2. In brief the case of the plaintiff bank is as under:
That the plaintiff bank has sanctioned term loan of Rs.3,00,000/- to the defendant on 28/4/2015. It is further contended that the defendant has executed and delivered On Demand Promissory Note dated 28/4/2015, letter dated 28/4/2015 and the execution of other documents in connection with the loan obtained by him from the plaintiff bank. It is further contended that after availing the loan the defendant has failed to pay the loan amount. It is further contended that the defendant has agreed to repay the loan amount in 60 monthly equal installments at the rate of Rs.6,700/-. It is further contended that the defendant has also agreed to pay interest at the rate of 11.70% per annum with monthly rest.
3. It is further contended that after availing the above said loan the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of the loan agreement. It is further contended that inspite of repeated request and causing of legal notice dated 5/11/2016 the defendant has failed to pay the loan amount. So the plaintiff bank has come up with the 4 present suit and in view of their above contention and other contentions taken in the plaint they prays for to decree the suit.
4. Inspite of repeated issuance of process to the defendant, the same was not served upon him. So the plaintiff bank took paper publication to the notice of defendant with regard to the filing of present suit and the same was duly published in the paper. Inspite of that the defendant has failed to appear before the court and consequently he has been placed exparte.
5. Heard the arguments.
6. The following points would arise for my consideration:
(1)Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for the suit claim amount ?
(2) What order ?
7. The plaintiff bank in order to establish their case the Chief Manager of the plaintiff bank himself got examined as PW1 and got 5 marked 11 documents from Ex.P1 to Ex.P11 and closed his side evidence.
8. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the affirmative
Point No.2 : As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
9. The plaintiff bank in order to establish their case the Chief Manager of the plaintiff bank himself got examined as PW1 and filed his affidavit by way of examination-in-chief, wherein he reiterated all the averments made in the plaint and in support of his case he got marked 11 documents from Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. In view of his above oral and documentary evidence he prays for to decree the suit.
10. The learned counsel for the plaintiff on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence adduced and produced by the plaintiff bank urged to decree the suit.
6
11. The plaintiff bank in order to establish their case that the defendant has obtained term loan of Rs.3,00,000/- they have produced loan application at Ex.P1 , loan sanction letter at Ex.P2, DPN letter at Ex.P3 and two letters relating to payment of installments, Ex.P5 undertaking agreement, Ex.P6 Irrevocable authority, Ex.P7 Declaration given by the defendant, Ex.D8 Hypothecation agreement. Upon perusal of the said documents it clearly goes to show that the defendant has availed term loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from the plaintiff bank on 20/4/2015. So also the said documents clearly depicts that the defendant has agreed to pay interest at the rate of 11.70% per month with monthly rest. So also upon perusal of the above said documents shows that the defendant has agreed to repay the above said loan in 60 monthly equal installments at the rate of Rs.6,700/- commencing from May 2015. The oral evidence given by PW1 is corroborated by the documentary evidence as referred above, i.e., at Ex.P1 to Ex.P8. It is the contention of the plaintiff that inspite of repeated request and causing of legal notice as per Ex.P9, the defendant failed to repay 7 the loan amount claimed by them. So they have come up with the present suit.
12. As it is already stated above the plaintiff bank has taken paper publication to the notice of defendant with regard to the filing of present suit and inspite of that the defendant has not turned up opposing the claim made by the plaintiff bank. The oral and documentary evidence placed before the court by the plaintiff bank clearly goes to show that they have made out grounds to decree the suit. The oral and documentary evidence placed before the court by the plaintiff bank remains unchallenged. Absolutely there is no contra evidence to disbelieve the case of plaintiff bank. When that would be the case, this court is left with no option except to answer point No. 1 for consideration in the affirmative. Accordingly point No. 1 is answered in the affirmative.
13. Point No. 2: In view of my findings to the above point, I proceed to pass the following:
8
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is hereby decreed with cost.
The defendant is hereby directed to pay Rs.2,40,158/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Forty Thousand One Hundred and Fifty Eight only) with future interest at the rate of 11.70% per annum with compounded monthly rest to the plaintiff bank from the date of filing the suit till the date of realisation within four months from the date of this order. Failing which the plaintiff bank is at liberty to take steps as per law.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment-Writer, transcribed, computerized and printout taken by her, revised and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2 nd day of July 2018.) (Sadananda M.Doddamani) XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE.9
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the plaintiff :
PW1 - P.S.L.Madhavi Witness examined for the defendant :
Nil Documents marked for the plaintiff :
Ex.P1 - Loan Application Ex.P2 - Loan sanction letter Ex.P3 - DPN Ex.P4 - 2 letters Ex.P5 - Undertaking agreement Ex.P6 - Irrevocable authority Ex.P7 - Declaration Ex.P8 - Hypothecation agreement Ex.P9 - Notice copy Ex.P10 - Postal endorsement Ex.P11 - Statement
Documents marked for the defendant :
Nil (Sadananda M.Doddamani) XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE.
10
Judgment pronounced in the open
court (vide separate detailed
Judgment)
ORDER
The suit of the plaintiff bank
is hereby decreed with cost.
The defendant is hereby
directed to pay Rs.2,40,158/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Forty Thousand One Hundred and Fifty Eight only) with future interest at the rate of 11.70% per annum with compounded monthly rest to the plaintiff bank from the date of filing the suit till the date of realisation within four months from the date of this order. Failing which the plaintiff bank is at liberty to take steps as per law.
Draw decree accordingly.11
XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE.