Bangalore District Court
Canara Bank vs Mrs.Dhorothy.J on 23 March, 2018
Before the VII Addl. Judge and XXXII ACMM,
Court of Small Causes at Bengaluru
(SCCH-3)
DATED THIS THE 23rd day of March 2018
PRESENT: Smt.GOMATI RAGHAVENDRA
LL.M, D.I.P.R, D.C.L
VII Addl. Judge & XXXII ACMM,
Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.
S.C. No.1084/2017
Plaintiff Canara Bank,
A Body corporate established under
the Banking Companies (Acquisition
and Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
1970, having its H.O. at No.112, J.C.
Road, Bangalore - 560 002.
And a branch Interalia at Cox Town,
Bangalore - 560 005.
Represented herein by its Manager &
GPA holder,
Mr.Rajendra Kumar Gandhi.
(By Sri.A.R.Desai, Advocate)
V/s
Defendant Mrs.Dhorothy.J,
No.36, Mizpah,
10th Cross, Kullappa Circle,
Kammanahalli,
Bangalore - 560 005.
(Exparte)
(SCCH-3) 2 SC 1084/17
Date of institution of the suit: 11-07-2017
Nature of the suit (suit on pronote,
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction etc.): Money recovery
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence: 21-03-2018
Date on which the Judgment 23-03-2018
is pronounced :
Total duration: Years Month/s Days
0 8 16
*********
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff bank against the defendant for recovery of money of Rs.60,032-00 with future interest at the rate of 11.95% p.a. compounded monthly and for Rs.7,447-00 with future interest at the rate of 17% p.a. compounded monthly, totaling to Rs.67,479-00 from the date of suit till its realization.
02. The case of the plaintiff bank in brief is as under:-
Plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act 1970. Defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000-00 on 23-12-2015 under the DPN (SCCH-3) 3 SC 1084/17 (Business)-P-Scheme of the plaintiff bank for carrying out vegetable business by executing Agreement-cum- deed of hypothecation dt:23-12-2015 agreeing to repay the same in monthly installments of Rs.1,100-00 each in 60 months commencing from February 2016 along with interest at 10.20% p.a. compounded monthly or at such rate/s as may be revised by the plaintiff bank from time to time. Defendant has also agreed to pay penal interest at 2% p.a. on the amounts overdue in case of default in the repayment schedule. Inspite of repeated requests and demands to settle the loan account and notice dt:11-05-2017, defendant has failed to settle the loan account. The plaintiff bank has revised rate of interest as per RBI guidelines at the rate of 9.95% p.a. with penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. Now, the defendant is due for Rs.60,032-00.
03. At the request of the defendant, plaintiff bank has also allowed temporary overdraft (T.O.D) of Rs.5,996-00 on 31-05-2016 in her S.B. account bearing No.1381101211293 for payment of installment due. The defendant has failed to clear her liability and regularize the account and as on date a sum of Rs.7,447-00 remains due in respect of this T.O.D. with interest at 17% p.a. i.e., 15% plus 2% penal interest. Thus, defendant is due in total a sum of Rs.67,479-00 with interest.
(SCCH-3) 4 SC 1084/1704. The cause of action for the suit arose on 22-12-2015 and 23-12-2015 and on various dates of payment such as 08-03-2016 and 24-05-2016 as reflected in the statement of account filed by plaintiff and subsequently when the defendant has failed to settle the loan account within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. Hence, this suit.
05. In response to the suit summons, defendant did not appear before the court and she placed exparte.
06. In order to prove the plaint averments, the plaintiff-bank has examined its Senior Manager as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.6 and closed its side evidence.
07. Heard the arguments.
08. The points that arise for Court consideration are as under:
1) Whether the plaintiff-bank is entitled for the relief as prayed?
2) What order or decree?
09. My answer to the above points is as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per final order
for the following:
(SCCH-3) 5 SC 1084/17
REASONS
Point No.1:
10. The Senior Manager of the plaintiff bank has filed his affidavit as his chief-examination as P.W.1. The affidavit evidence of P.W.1 is nothing but replica of plaint averments. P.W.1 in support of the oral evidence has produced the documents marked at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5 such as Sanction memorandum, Application for loan, Deed of hypothecation-cum- agreement, Legal notice, Statement of account in respect of loan and Statement of account in respect of SB account. Perusal of aforesaid documents, it reveals that the plaintiff-bank has sanctioned a sum of Rs.50,000-00 as loan and temporary overdraft of Rs.5,996-00 to the defendant and she executed some documents to that effect, but defendant did not pay the due amount inspite of repeated requests and demands. Therefore, plaintiff bank issued a legal notice as per Ex.P.4 to the defendant calling upon her to repay the loan amount, but inspite of notice she did not pay the balance amount of Rs.67,479-00. Though, the summons was served on the defendant, she did not appear before the Court and placed exparte. It appears that defendant has admitted the plaint contents and she has no counter against the plaintiff (SCCH-3) 6 SC 1084/17 case. So, the evidence of P.W.1 and the contents of the plaint averments are remained unchallenged. If at all, the defendant has not availed the loan from the plaintiff bank as alleged in the plaint, she would have appeared and resisted the claim of the plaintiff, but she did not appear nor file the written statement. In the case on hand, the plaintiff bank has proved its case through oral and documentary evidence. However, the rate of interest claimed by plaintiff bank at 11.95% and 17% compounded monthly appears highly exorbitant. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials on record, it is just and proper to grant 9% interest p.a., instead of 11.95% and 17% p.a. Accordingly, I answered Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
11. Point No.2:
In view of my answer to the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is decreed with costs.
The defendant is liable to pay the decreetal amount of Rs.67,479-00 with future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to the plaintiff bank from the date of (SCCH-3) 7 SC 1084/17 suit till its realization within two months from the date of this order.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court this the 23rd day of March 2018) (GOMATI RAGHAVENDRA) VII Addl. Judge & XXXII ACMM, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined on behalf of plaintiff:
P.W.1 Rajendra Kumar List of the documents exhibited on behalf of plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 Copy of Sanction memorandum
Ex.P.2 Application for loan
Ex.P.3 Deed of hypothecation-cum-agreement
Ex.P.4 Legal notice
Ex.P.4(a) Postal receipt
Ex.P.5 Certified Statement of account in respect
of loan
Ex.P.6 Certified Statement of account in respect
of SB account
(SCCH-3) 8 SC 1084/17
List of the witnesses examined on behalf of defendant:
-Nil-
List of the documents marked on behalf of defendant:
Nil (GOMATI RAGHAVENDRA) VII Addl. Judge & XXXII ACMM, Bengaluru.