Delhi District Court
The Present Suit Filed By The vs . on 18 February, 2012
IN THE COURT OF MS. KADAMBARI, CIVIL JUDGE-III (NORTH),
ROOM NO.231, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
C.S.No.182/10
State Bank of India
A Corporation constituted under State Bank of India Act
1955 having its Central Office/Corporate Centre at State Bank
Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai 40024, one of its Local Head
Office at 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi -1 and its Stressed Assets
Resolution Centre at 23, First Floor, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi.
Vs.
(1) Manohar Lal
R/O H. No. -53, Type-II,
Delhi Jal Board Staff Quarters,
Model Town -III,
Delhi-9.
Also At:-
Sh. Manohar Lal,
UDC
O/o Delhi Jal Board, Headquarters,
Varunalya Phase-I, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-5.
(2) Sh. Rakesh Uniyal,
R/o RZ-94, Durga Vihar Colony,
Phase -I, Block-A, Street No. -4,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-43.
18.02.2012
Judgment U/Or. 37.
1.The present suit filed by the plaintiff for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 1,59,328/- under provisions of Order 37 CPC.
As per the plaint,the case of the Plaintiff is as under:-
(a) On 16.01.2006, the Defendant No. 1 alongwith Defendant No. 2 (Guarantors) approached the plaintiff bank at Jwala Heri Branch for granting of loan under Personal Loan Scheme for Rs.1,24,000/- Both the defendants also agreed to pay the all out standing amount along with the interest jointly and severally.
(b) Defendant No. 1's failed to observe the terms and conditions on which the plaintiff granted the Personal Loan, the account became and continued to be irregular and inspite of the requests, the defendants failed to regularize the account. Now, a sum of Rs.1,59,328/- is recoverable from the defendant. It is also agreed by the defendants that the plaintiff Bank shall also charge a penal interest of 15 % per annum.
(c) Despite demands made by the plaintiff bank, time and again all defendants failed to observe the financial discipline imposed and agreed upon by them.
(d) Plaintiff prayed for pass a decree under Or.37 CPC for the recovery of Rs.1,59,328/- alongwith interest @15.25% per annum.
2. In this case defendants were served and an application for leave to defend along with an application U/Sec. 5 of Limitation Act has been filed by the defendant vide order dated 22.09.2010 and since then none has appeared on behalf of the defendants. Vide an order passed on 16.02.2012 application for leave to defend is dismissed for non prosecution.
3. I have heard the counsel for the plaintiff and gone through the record carefully. Since the defendants have failed to pursue the matter diligently and as such I am satisfied that defendants have nothing to say about the case of the plaintiff. The plaintiff in the present suit has claimed a total amount of Rs. 1,59,328/- along with interest at the rate of 15.25% per annum & with pendentelite & future interest.
4. The Court is of the opinion that, the rate of interest at the rate of 15.25% per annum is very exorbitant, hence in the interest of justice suit is decreed for total amount of Rs.1,59,328/- along with the intrest of 12.5% per annum till the date of the decree.
5. Foregoing reasons the suit of the plaintiff is decreed and the plaintiff is entitled for sum of Rs.1,59,328/- along with the pendatelite and future interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum from filing of the suit till the date of decree. No order as to cost. Decree sheet be prepared.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in Open Court (KADAMBARI) today i.e 18.02.2012 at 4 pm. CJ/NORTH/DELHI/18.02.2012