Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Bank Of Baroda vs Sri. Ramesh R on 21 December, 2020

 Before the Court of XXIII Additional Small Causes
                Judge at Bangalore

                         (SCCH­25)
              Present: Miss.B.T.ANNAPOORNESHWARI
                                B.A., L.L.B., L.L.M.

            XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge,
                         Bangalore.

        Dated this the 21st day of December 2020

                      S.C.No.888/2020

Plaintiff         :         Bank of Baroda
                            (Earier Dena Bank)
                             A body corporate constituted
                             by and under the banking
                             companies (Acquisition &
                             Transfer of undertakings)
                             Act, 1970, having head offie
                             situated at Baroda Bhavan,
                             RC Dutt Road, Alkapuri,
                             Vadodara, Gujarat State and
                             interalia branch office at
                             Peenya Branch, Bangalore.
                             Rep by its Chief Manager &
                             PA holder
                             Mr. Sanjay Wali
                             S/o Shivapurtra Wali,
                             aged about 38 years.

                            (By Sri.Nagaraja Damodara, Advocate)
                               2                   SC 888/2020
                                                     SCCH-25

Defendant/s       :          Sri. Ramesh R
                             S/o Sri.Rajanna,
                             Aged about 42 years,
                             R/at No.608, 5th Main Road,
                             Vijayananda Nagara,
                             Nandhini Layout,
                             Bangalore - 560 096.

                             (Ex­parte)


Date of institution of the suit:          08.10.2020


Nature of the suit (suit on pronote,
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction etc.):                Recovery of money


Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence:                16.12.2020


Date on which the judgment
is pronounced :                         21.12.2020



Total duration:                    Years Month/s Days
                                   00        02        13


                                          XXIII Addl. Judge
                                3                    SC 888/2020
                                                       SCCH-25
[[




                     JUDGMENT

The Plaintiff Bank has filed the suit against the Defendant for recovery of loan amount of Rs.1,05,703.52 at the rate of Rs.9.95% p.a. together with penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. compounded monthly from 22.09.2020 till its realization.

2. The case of the Plaintiff Bank in brief is that:­ The Plaintiff is a Banking company, financial facility had been availed by the Defendant from Dena Bank, Peenya branch, Bangalore by executing necessary loan documents, whereas the Central Government of India vide its extraordinary Gazette Notification dated 02.01.2019 formed and promulgated the scheme called 'the Amalgamation of Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank with Bank of Baroda scheme 2019, by 4 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 virtue of which Vijaya Bank and 'Dena Bank' have been amalgamated with 'Bank of Baroda' and upon the said amalgamation the name of the new so amalgamated bank is declared to be that of the surviving entity known by the name "Bank of Baroda". Hence present suit is institued in the name of Bank of Baroda. The Defendant availed vehicle loan facility of Rs.1,20,000/­ by executing necessary documetns on 21.03.2012 under loan account NO.073354023904. The Defendant agreed to repay the same within 60 Equated Monthly Installments at the rate of Rs.2,000/­ each along with interest @ 12.50% p.a. with monthly rests. But, the Defendant failed to pay the installments and becmae chronic defaulter. In spite of repeated demands and personal approaches made by the Plaintiff bank he did not clear the loan amount for a sum of Rs.1,05,703.52.

3. In pursuance to registration of the case, the 5 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 suit summons issued to the Defendant. But the Defendant, in spite of due service of summons, has not appeared and filed written statement, hence, he is placed ex­parte.

4. The Plaintiff in order to prove its case examined its Chief Manager - Sheela Kumari as PW.1 and produced 7 documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.7.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff.

6. Now the points that arise for the consideration are:­

1. Whether the Plaintiff bank proved that, on 21.03.2012, the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/­ from the Plaintiff bank by executing necessary documents in favor of the Plaintiff bank?

2. If so, whether the Plaintiff is entitled for interest then what is 6 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 the quantum of interest?

3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for suit claim?

4. What judgment or decree?

7. On hearing the counsel for the Plaintiff and on perusal of oral and documentary evidence on records this court answers on the above points as here under:

Point No.1 : In the affirmative Point No.2 : In the affirmative Point No.3 : In the affirmative Point No.4 : As per the final order for the following:­ REASONS

8. Point No.1:­ It is the specific case of the Plaintiff that, on 7 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 21.03.2012 the Defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/­ from the Plaintiff bank by executing necessary documents in favor of the Plaintiff bank promising to repay the said amount within 60 monthly installments at the rate of Rs.2,000/­ per installment with interest at the rate of Rs.12.50% p.a., compounded monthly. But, the Defendant failed to pay the installments regularly and clear the liability and thereby committed default in payment of the said amount.

9. The Plaintiff, in order to prove these facts apart from examining its Chief Manager as PW.1, has produced 9 documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.7. Ex.P.1 is the loan application dated 23.02.2012, Ex.P.2 is the loan sanction letter dated 20.03.2012, Ex.P.3 is the DP note dated 21.03.2012, Ex.P.4 is the letter of hypothecation dated 21.03.2012, Ex.P.5 is the letter of 8 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 general lien dated 21.03.2012, Ex.P.6 is the B register exract and Ex.P.7 is the certified copy of statement of account. As per Section 4 of the Bankers Books Evidence Act the certified documents of the entry is prima­facie evidence of the existence of such entry and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded. Exs.P.1 to P.5 documents contains the signature of the Defendant. The PW.1 has reiterated the plaint averments in his chief­examination. The Defendant has not appeared, in spite of due service of summons. As such there is no written statement. In the absence of written statement it shall be deemed the respondent has admitted the claim of the Plaintiff bank. There is no cross­examination of PW.1 also. There is nothing on record to rebut the oral and documentary evidence produced by the Plaintiff bank. Under such circumstances, relying upon the oral and documentary 9 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 evidence of the Plaintiff bank, this court has come to the conclusion that, the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/­ from the Plaintiff bank and has not repaid the same in spite of repeated demands. Accordingly point No.1 is held in the affirmative.

10. Point No.2:­ The Plaintiff bank has claimed interest @ 12.50% per annum compounded monthly. In this regard, the Plaintiff has produced sanction letter, deed of hypothecation and letter of general lien as per Exs.P.2 & P.4 which is signed by the Defendant. In the said document, it is mentioned that the Defendant has agreed to pay the interest at the rate of Rs.12.50% p.a. compounded monthly. These documents are first in transaction between the Plaintiff bank and the Defendant. There is no dispute about this documents as the Defendant is exparte. Therefore, this court has 10 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 to relay upon the said document and come to the conclusion that the Plaintiff bank is entitled for interest as claimed. Accordingly, point No.2 is held in the affirmative.

11. Point No.3:­ The Plaintiff bank specifically pleaded and proved before this court that, the Defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.1,20,000/­ by executing necessary documents in favor of the Plaintiff bank and undertaken to repay the same in installments. But later failed repay the installments regularly. The bank statement as per Ex.P.7 clearly show that still the Defendant has not cleared the dues and he has neither paid the balance amount. The Plaintiff bank also proved and substantiated that it is entitled for interest at the rate of Rs.12.50% compounded at monthly from the date of 11 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 suit till the date of realisation. Under these circumstances, this court is of the opinion that, the Plaintiff is entitled for decree of suit. Accordingly, Point No.3 is held in the affirmative.

12. Point No. 4:­ For the reasons and discussions made above and findings given on point Nos.1 to 3, this court proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost.
The Plaintiff bank is entitled to recover from the defendant a sum of Rs.1,05,703.52 with future interest @ 9.95% p.a. and penal interest of 2% p.a. compounded monthly from 22.09.2020 till realization of entire decreetal amount.
12 SC 888/2020

SCCH-25 Office to draw decree accordingly. (Dictated to the stenographer on line, revised, corrected and then pronounced in the open court this the 21st day of December 2020.) (Miss.B.T.ANNAPOORNESHWARI) XXIII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.

ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff:

PW.1 Sheela Kumari List of the documents exhibited on behalf of Plaintiff:

Ex.P.1 Loan application 23.02.2012, Ex.P.2 Loan Sanction letter dated 20.03.2012, Ex.P.3 DP note dated 21.03.2012, Ex.P.4 Letter of hypothecation dated 21.03.2012,, Ex.P.5 Letter of general lien dated 21.03.2012, Ex.P.6 B register extract, 13 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 Ex.P.7 Certified copy of statement of account.

List of the witnesses examined on behalf of Defendant:

­­ NIL -
List of the documents exhibited on behalf of Defendant:
­­ NIL ­­ (Miss.B.T.ANNAPOORNESHWARI) XXIII Addl. Small Causes Judge, Bangalore.
14 SC 888/2020
SCCH-25 21.12.2020 Judgment pronounced in open court (vide separate judgment) with the following operative portion:-
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost.
The Plaintiff bank is entitled to recover from the defendant a sum of Rs.1,05,703.52 with future interest @ 9.95% p.a. and penal interest of 2% p.a. compounded monthly from 22.09.2020 till realization of entire decreetal amount.

Office to draw decree accordingly.

XXIII Addl. Judge­Member, MACT, Bangalore.

15 SC 888/2020

SCCH-25 DECREE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT BANGALORE S.C.No.888/2020 Plaintiff : Bank of Baroda (Earier Dena Bank) A body corporate constituted by and under the banking companies (Acquisition & Transfer of undertakings) Act, 1970, having head offie situated at Baroda Bhavan, RC Dutt Road, Alkapuri, Vadodara, Gujarat State and interalia branch office at Peenya Branch, Bangalore.

Rep by its Chief Manager & PA holder Mr. Sanjay Wali S/o Shivapurtra Wali, aged about 38 years.

(By Sri.Nagaraja Damodara, Advocate) Defendant/s : Sri. Ramesh R S/o Sri.Rajanna, Aged about 42 years, R/at No.608, 5th Main Road, Vijayananda Nagara, Nandhini Layout, Bangalore - 560 096.

Ex­parte) 16 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 Claim: Suit filed on prays for directing Defendantto pay a sum of Rs...............with interest at the rate of ...........

This suit coming on for final disposal before Miss.B.T.Annapoorneshwari, XXIII Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, in the presence of Sri/Smt. Advocate, for the Plaintiff and Sri/Smt. Advocate, for the Defendant.

ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost.

The Plaintiff bank is entitled to recover from the defendant a sum of Rs.1,05,703.52 with future interest @ 9.95% p.a. and penal interest of 2% p.a. 17 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 compounded monthly from 22.09.2020 till realization of entire decreetal amount.

Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this day of 2020 REGISTRAR, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore.

MEMORANDUM OF COST INCURRED IN THIS SUIT By the Plaintiff Defendant Court fee on plaint Court fee on power Court fee on exhibits Service of process + Postal charges Commissioner's fees 18 SC 888/2020 SCCH-25 Pleaders fee Total of Rs.

Amount payable by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is Rs.

Decree Drafted Scrutinized by REGISTRAR, Court of Small Causes, Decree Clerk Shirastedar Bangalore.