Bangalore District Court
Bank Of Baroda vs Shree Mms Creations on 16 January, 2023
1
KABC170033492022
IN THE COURT OF LXXXVII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, (EXCLUSIVE DEDICATED
COMMERCIAL COURT) AT BENGALURU (CCH.88)
THIS THE 16th DAY OF JANUARY 2023
PRESENT:
SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH H. M.,
B.Com., LL.M.,
LXXXVII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU.
Com.O.S.No. 1752/2022
PLAINTIFF : Bank of Baroda
Nagappa Block Branch
No.61 M.K.Road, Nagappa Block,
Near Devaiah Park, Srirampuram,
Bengaluru, Karnataka-560 021
Represented by its Senior
Manager Mr.Yerriswamy T,
S/o. Late. Thippanna T,
Aged about 39 years.
(Rep. by PHK. Advocate)
AND
DEFENDANT : Shree MMS Creations,
Proprietor Poornima A.J.
W/o Srinivasa.D.
Aged about 32 years
R/at No.05, Behind Govt. School
1st Cross, Ramaswamy Layout
Andrahalli, Vishwaneedam Post
Bangalore-560 091.
(Exparte)
2
Date of Institution of the 28.11.2022
suit
Nature of the suit (suit on Money suit
pronote, suit for declaration
& Possession, Suit for
injunction etc.)
Date of commencement of 10.01.2023
recording of evidence
Date on which judgment
was pronounced 16.01.2023
Total Duration Year/s Month/s Day/s
00 01 18
(VIRUPAKSHAIAH H M),
LXXXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge,
(Exclusive Commercial Court)
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff bank has filed the suit against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.12,12,807=10/- as on 03.06.2022 along with future interest at the rate of 11.05% p.a. from 04.08.2022 till the date of repayment. 3
2. The plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertaking) Act, 1980 having its Head Office at Bank of Baroda, Baroda Bhavan, R.C. Dutt Road, Alkapuri, Baroda, inter-alia having a Branch at Nagappa Street Branch, Bengaluru represented by its Chief Manager. Plaintiff submits that the defendant is a Borrower. The defendant had approached the Plaintiff Bank for a financial assistance to manufacture readymade garments loan which was a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as per the Loan Application dated 05.10.2019, the plaintiff had considered the defendant's requests and sanctioned the Loan amount of Rs.10,00,000/- on 24.10.2019 with interest at the rate of 9.50% (Floating) p.a. in loan Account No.115505207000036 now amalgamated to Bank of Baroda Account No.73900600000568. The defendant had executed: on Demand Promissory Note dated:24.10.2019; Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated:24.10.2019; Instrument of Hypothecation of Movable Machinery dated:24.10.2019 and 4 declarations cum Undertaking cum authority dated 24.10.2019.
3. Plaintiff on 23.02.2022 has issued Legal Notice to defendant recalling the entire outstanding amount in business loan account in view of the default by him and same is returned as not served. Defendant had failed to repay the admitted outstanding due amount. Defendant was very irregular in the matter of repayment of loan amount and its interests. Defendant had unquestionably failed and neglected to repay the loan amount as agreed, in spite of repeated requests and notices. The amount due to the plaintiff towards the Principal and interest is of Rs.12,12,807.10 together with interest as on 03.06.2022, with future interests from 04.06.2022 till the date of repayment.
4. The cause of action for the suit arose on 05.10.2019, when the defendant applied for a credit facility, on 24.10.2019, when the defendant took advantage of the credit facility, and when the District legal Service Authority 5 passed order dated 29.07.2022 in favour of Plaintiff Bank. Hence this suit.
5. Inspite of issuance of summons through paper publication, the defendant did not appear before the Court. Accordingly, she was placed ex-parte. The Manager, NPA of the plaintiff Bank got examined herself as PW1 and got marked 11 documents as Ex.P1 to P11.
6. Heard, learned counsel for the plaintiff. Perused the written argument and documents.
7. The points that arise for my consideration are:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief claimed in the plaint ?
2. What Order or decree ?
8. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 :- In the Affirmative. Point No.2 :- As per the final Order for the following reasons. REASONS
9. Point No.1 :- In order to prove the case, the plaintiff mainly relies upon the oral evidence of PW-1 and 6 documents at Ex.P1 to P11 and the Learned counsel for the plaintiff would argue to support the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence of the plaintiff and lastly prays to decree the suit.
10. PW-1 specifically deposed by way of filing affidavit in lieu of his chief-examination and reiterated the facts as averred in the plaint once again on oath and has produced the documents at Ex.P1 to P11. Ex.P.1 is the loan application. Ex.P.2 is the Sanction letter. Ex.P.3 is the Demand promissory note. Ex.P.4 is the Composite hyphothecation agreement. Ex.P.5 is the Instrument of hypothecation agreement of movable machinery. Ex.P.6 is the Declaration cum undertaking cum authority. Ex.P.7 is Office copy of the legal notice. Ex.P.8 is the Postal receipt. Ex.P.9 postal acknowledgement, Ex.P.10 is the statement of account with Certificate of u/S.65(b) of Indian Evidence Act. And Ex.P.11 is the PIM report. They are all established that the defendant had approached the plaintiff Bank for financial assistance to manufacture readymade garments and the plaintiff sanctioned the same in favour of defendant 7 and the defendant executed necessary loan documents in favour of plaintiff and the loan account No. 115505207000036 amalgamated to the Bank of Baroda, Account No. 7390060000568, thereafter the Defendant had failed to repay the same, the plaintiff Bank issued recall notice and legal notice for payment of outstanding due amount.
11. The oral evidence of P.W.1 and the documents are corroborate with each other and conformity with the plaint contents, they are all support the claim of the plaintiff. These evidences are unchallenged by the defendant and there are no any reason to discard the claim of the plaintiff.
12. The proceedings being civil in nature, the appreciation of evidence necessarily under the touch stone of preponderance of probabilities as against the proof beyond all reasonable doubt in a criminal case. The very fact that the defendant remained absent and not contested the case indicates that he is not disputing the claim of the plaintiff alleged against them in the plaint. When the 8 defendant does not enter into the witness box and deny the case of the plaintiff and states his own case on oath and does not offer themselves to be cross-examined by the plaintiff, a presumption would arise that a case set up by the plaintiff bank is correct. It would give rise to an inference adverse against them and drew a presumption under Section 114 of Evidence Act against the defendant. When the defendant failed to disprove the case of the plaintiff and discard the evidence and there is no any reason to discard the same, there is no impediment to decree the suit. The transaction involved in the suit is a commercial, the defendant agreed and executed necessary documents in respect of interest on the loan amount, hence the defendant is held liable to repay the loan amount to the plaintiff bank along with interest. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the material on record, I am of the view that the suit of the plaintiff bank is decreed. Hence, answer point No.1 in the Affirmative.
13. Point No.2 :- For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed 9 to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff Bank is hereby decreed with costs.
The Defendant is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.12,12,807=10/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Twelve Thousand Eight Hundred Seven and Paise Ten Only) with interest at the rate of 11.05% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization.
The Advocate for the plaintiff is directed to file Memorandum of Cost before the Office within 5 days from today.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer online, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in open Court on this the 16th day of January, 2023).
(VIRUPAKSHAIAH H M), LXXXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, (Exclusive dedicated Commercial Court) Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE 10 LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF PW-1 Mr.Yarriswamy LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF Ex.P.1 : Loan application.
Ex.P.2 : Sanction letter.
Ex.P.3 : Demand promissory note.
Ex.P.4 : Composite hyphothecation agreement.
Ex.P.5 : Instrument of hypothecation of movable
machinery
Ex.P.6 : Declaration cum undertakings cum
authority.
Ex.P.7 : Office copy of the legal notice.
Ex.P.8 : Postal receipt.
Ex.P.9 : Postal acknowledgement.
Ex.P.10 : Statement of account with certificate under
Section . 65 (b) of Indian Evidence Act.
Ex.P.11 : PIM report.
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT NIL 11 LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT NIL (VIRUPAKSHAIAH H M), LXXXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
12