Delhi District Court
Mr. Rohit Mehra vs Mr. Prithipal Singh Chawla on 24 August, 2011
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE05 (SOUTH), SAKET
COURTS, NEW DELHI
Presided by: Ms. Manika
CS No. 153/11
Unique Case ID No. 02406C0044012011
IDBI Bank Limited
Having Head Office At:
the World Trade Centre Complex
Cuffe Parade, Mumbai400005,
And having its Regional Office at
54, Ring Road, Lajpat NagarIII
New Delhi110024
Through Its Authorized Representative
Mr. Rohit Mehra. ...PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
Mr. Prithipal Singh Chawla
S/o Late Sh. Darshan Singh Chawla
Suit No. 153/11 Page 1 of 6
1101 Plot No. 10 A
Park Royal Apartment Dwarka
New Delhi110045.
Also At:
Mr. Prithipal Singh Chawla
Kartar Tyre House 1695
Arya Samaj Road Karol Bagh
Delhi110005. ...DEFENDANT
Date of institution : 24.02.2011
Date of reserving : 11.08.2011
Date of pronouncement : 24.08.2011
JUDGMENT
1. This judgment disposes off the plaintiff's suit for recovery filed under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'C.P.C.') for recovery of Rs.85,949/ along with pendentelite and future interest at the rate of 24% per annum along with costs from the defendant.
2. Briefly stated, the case of the plaintiff is that the suit is Suit No. 153/11 Page 2 of 6 instituted through Sh. Rohit Mehra, who is duly authorized to sign and verify the pleadings and institute the suit. It is averred that the defendant approached the Delhi office of the plaintiff and requested the plaintiff bank for grant of a personal loan of Rs.2,75,000/ for closure of his earlier loan account bearing No. 806675000092463 with plaintiff bank, and rest for his personal use. After due consideration plaintiff bank sanctioned the loan and transferred Rs.1,62,130/ for closure of the aforesaid earlier account of the defendant and disbursed the balance amount of Rs.1,11,192/ as per the defendant's request and transferred the same to his account in the Punjab National Bank. The defendant executed personal loan agreement No. 806675100168717 dated 10.11.2005 and other documents in favour of the plaintiff bank and agreed to repay the said loan in 36 equated monthly installment (EMIs) of Rs.9,805/ each as per the repayment schedule.
3. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the defendant, however, failed to adhere to the financial discipline of repayment of the EMIs towards both principal as well as interest/charges thereon. Several ECS instructions/postdated cheques issued by the defendant for repayment were dishonoured. The last payment was received from the defendant on 06.11.2008. The demand notice/loan recall notice dated 20.10.2010 Suit No. 153/11 Page 3 of 6 sent by the plaintiff was neither replied to nor complied with by the defendant. On the date of the filing of the suit, the defendant was liable to pay a sum of Rs.85,949/ towards principal, interest and other dues.
4. It is with these averments that the present suit has been filed under the provisions of Order XXXVII of the C.P.C. for recovery of the above mentioned sum on the basis of written contract.
5. To substantiate its claim, the plaintiff has filed a photocopy of general power of attorney in favour of Sh. Rohit Mehra, original clean loan agreement dated 10.11.2005, original foreclosure statement dated 10.02.2011, certified customer account ledger report for the period 27.01.2000 to 20.09.2010, copy of legal notice dated 20.10.2010, original postal receipts thereof, original loan application form for clean loan dated 29.10.2005, original offer coupon dated 04.08.2005, original facility letter dated 09.11.2005, original letter of the defendant for foreclosure of previous personal loan account, copy of passport of the defendant and copy of electricity bill in the name of the defendant.
6. Vide order dated 25.02.2011, summons as prescribed under Order XXXVII C.P.C. were ordered to be issued against the defendant. Suit No. 153/11 Page 4 of 6 Summons through registered AD at the Karol Bagh address of the defendant were received back with the remark 'Refused' dated 30.04.2011. Thus, the defendant was deemed to have been duly served on 30.04.2011.
7. Vide order dated 06.06.2011, a report was called from the Reader and Ahlmad as to whether any application for entering appearance had been filed on behalf of the defendant. The Reader and Ahlmad have reported that no such application has been filed on behalf of the defendant. Therefore, the defendant has failed to enter appearance till date.
8. In terms of the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 2 (3) of the C.P.C., as no appearance has been filed on behalf of the defendant, the allegations made in the plaint are deemed to be admitted by the defendant.
9. The plaintiff has sought pendentelite and future interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The same is, in the opinion of this Court, excessive. The ends of justice would be met if pendentelite interest at the rate of 09% per annum is awarded in favour of the plaintiff. Under Order XXXVII Rule 2 (3) of the C.P.C., the plaintiff is not entitled to Suit No. 153/11 Page 5 of 6 future interest.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present suit is hereby decreed for a sum of Rs.85,949/ (Rupees Eighty Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Nine only) in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant along with pendentelite interest at the rate of 09% per annum and costs of the suit.
11. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Court on 24.08.2011.
(MANIKA) CJ05 (South), New Delhi 24.08.2011 Suit No. 153/11 Page 6 of 6