Delhi District Court
State Bank Of India vs Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dawar on 24 July, 2018
IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK DABAS:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-05: WEST:
TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI
CivDJ/613172/2016
STATE BANK OF INDIA
A corporation constituted under
State Bank of India Act 1955
having its Central Office/Corporate
Centre at State Bank Bhawan,
Madam Cama Road Mumbai-400024,
one of its Local Head Office at 11,
Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001
and as Stressed Assets
Recovery branch unit RACPC at A-1/24
Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058
Through its Chief Manager
Mr. V.R. Meena ...........Plaintiff
Versus
MR. PANKAJ KUMAR DAWAR
S/o Shri Pradip Dawar
R/o 42C, Lal Quarter
Punjabi Bagh West,
New Delhi-110026.
Also at:-
6/A, Lal Quarter
West Punjabi Bagh,
New Delhi-110026. .........Defendant
State Bank of India Vs. Pankaj Kumar Dawar Page No. 1/5
Date of institution of suit:-01.08.2016
Date of reserving for order:-24.07.2018
Date of pronouncement:-24.07.2018
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.8,81,162/-
Ex-parte Judgment
1.Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.8,81,162/- (Rs. Eight Lacs Eighty One Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Two Only) alongwith pendentelite and future interest.
2. According to plaintiff, it is a corporate body constituted under State Bank of India Act 1955. The present suit has been filed/instituted by Mr. V.R. Meena i.e. Chief Manager of plaintiff.
3. According to plaintiff, on 18.02.2014, defendant approached plaintiff bank for financial assistance for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- and applied for the same by submitting a loan application/bio data form dated 18.02.2014 alongwith supporting documents under the Vehicle/Term Loan Scheme. After scrutiny of all the documents and economic viability, plaintiff bank agreed to sanction financial facility to defendant.
4. According to plaintiff, defendant executed loan documents on 18.02.2014 in favour of plaintiff for repayment of said loan amount and State Bank of India Vs. Pankaj Kumar Dawar Page No. 2/5 it was agreed that defendant shall pay interest on the loan amount @0.75% p.a. margin above base rate.The defendant agreed/undertook to repay the loan amount in 84 equated monthly installments of Rs.11,968/- each.
5. According to plaintiff, after execution of all the relevant documents, plaintiff bank disbursed the loan amount of Rs.7 lacs by opening a loan account no.33673616258 with it. The defendant duly availed/used the aforesaid loan amount/facility from plaintiff bank but thereafter, the defendant failed to honour his undertaking/assurances and committed regular defaults in paying monthly installments. Consequently, the account of plaintiff was treated as NPA on 18.09.2014.
6. According to plaintiff, defendant was contacted and requested several times to pay the loan/installment amount and regularize his loan account but defendant failed to regularize his account. Legal/demand notice dated 28.06.2016 was sent by plaintiff to defendant. However, defendant neither replied to said notice nor made payment to plaintiff. Hence, the present suit has been filed for recovery of aforesaid amount.
7. Ordinary summons were sent to defendant. Inspite of service, defendant failed to appear in Court and was proceeded exparte vide order dated 17.10.2016. Matter was adjourned for exparte P.E.
8. In support of its case, plaintiff has produced and examined only State Bank of India Vs. Pankaj Kumar Dawar Page No. 3/5 one witness. PW-1 is Ms Suresh Bala i.e. Chief Manager, State Bank of India. PW-1 filed her evidence by way of affidavit i.e. Ex.PW-1/A. PW1 relied upon documents i.e. Ex.PW-1/1 to Ex.PW-1/12.
9. In her evidence by way of affidavit, PW-1 reiterated the facts mentioned in plaint and the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
10. Testimony of PW-1 has remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Defendant was proceeded exparte since very beginning therefore PW-1 was not cross examined by or on behalf of defendant.
11. Attested Copy of Gazette and Authority Letter are Ex.PW-1/1 and Ex.PW-1/2 respectively. Loan Application filed by defendant dated 18.02.2014 is Ex.PW-1/3. Arrangement letter dated 18.02.2014 is Ex.PW-1/4. Loan-cum-hypothecation agreement and other documents dated 18.02.2014 are Ex.PW-1/5 & Ex.PW-1/6 respectively. Copy of legal demand notice dated 28.06.2016 and receipt of Speed Post are Ex.PW-1/7 & Ex.PW-1/8 respectively. Statement of Account is Ex.PW- 1/9. Certificate of accrued interest is Ex.PW-1/10,.CBS Certificate as per Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act 1872 is Ex.PW-1/11 and plaint of present suit is Ex.PW-1/12.
12. After perusal of evidence led by plaintiff in support of its case, I am of the considered view that plaintiff has successfully proved that State Bank of India Vs. Pankaj Kumar Dawar Page No. 4/5 defendant had taken/availed loan of Rs.7 lacs from plaintiff. Defendant was very irregular in paying monthly installments. Inspite of repeated requests made by plaintiff, defendant failed to repay the outstanding amount. Legal notice i.e. Ex.PW-1/7 was sent to defendant but inspite of it, defendant failed to pay the outstanding amount to plaintiff. The suit has been filed within limitation and this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present suit. There is no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted and unchallenged testimony of PW-1.
13. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the suit filed by plaintiff is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
A decree for a sum of Rs.8,81,162/- is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to simple interest on the aforesaid amount @ 10.05% per annum from date of filing of present suit till the realization of the decreetal amount. Plaintiff shall also be entitled to cost of the suit.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signedDEEPAK by DEEPAK DABAS DABAS Date: 2018.07.24 16:31:48 +0530 Announced in the open Court (DEEPAK DABAS) Dated :-24th July 2018 ADJ-05, WEST DISTRICT TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI State Bank of India Vs. Pankaj Kumar Dawar Page No. 5/5