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 0, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Union Bank Of India vs S.G. Industries on 6 January, 2022

 IN THE COURT OF XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
      SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-43)

                  Present: Sri. Kengabalaiah,
                                      B.Com., LL.B.
              XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge.

              Dated this 6 th Day of January, 2022

                      O.S.No. 5560/2020

Plaintiff/s     :      Union Bank of India
                       E-Corporation Bank,
                       Nagarabhavi Branch,
                       No.527, Ground floor,
                       II Stage, 3rd block, Nagarbhavi,
                       Bengaluru.

                       Rep.by its Branch Manager, M.S.
                       Santhosh Kumar.

                       [By Sri. M.V.S, Adv.]

                        -Vs-

Defendant/s :          S.G. Industries,
                       No.112/5-22,
                       Doddanna Industrial Estate,
                       13th   cross,    old 15th    cross,
                       Vishwaneedam Post,
                       Peenya 2nd stage,
                       Bengaluru.
                       Represented by its proprietor Mrs.
                       N. Manjula W/o Karuna Murthy.


                       [Ex-parte]

Date of institution of the suit          10.11.2020
Nature of the suit                       Money suit
Date of commencement of                  03.12.2021
recording the evidence
                                     2                    OS.No.5560/2020
Date on which the judgment                       06.01.2022
was pronounced
Total duration                           Years    Months        Days
                                          01        01          27


                                   (Kengabalaiah),
                        XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge.

                              *********

                          J UD GM E N T

      The plaintiff bank has filed this suit against the

defendant for recovery of money.


     2.      The case of the plaintiff bank is that, the plaintiff

bank is the banking company governed under provisions of

banking companies Act 1970, formerly Corporation Bank

amalgamated with Union Bank of India its head office at

Mumbai and its Branch office at Interalia at Nagarabhavi,

Bengaluru. The defendant is a proprietary ship represented

by   its   proprietor    Manjula     and       defendant   carrying     on

business.       The     defendant       availed    the   term    loan   of

Rs.5,00,000/-     vide     account        No.560656000016166            for

expansion of her business.          The plaintiff bank has granted

loan on 19.02.2016 on the hypothication of machinery which

repayable in monthly installments of Rs.10,972/- per month

with a period of 60 months commencing from 31.03.2016.
                               3               OS.No.5560/2020
The defendant has executed loan documents agreeing to

repay the loan amount on demand together interest           @

11.40% p.a. compounded monthly for value received and also

agreed to pay the overdue interest at the rate of 2% p.a. in

case of default in repayment of the loan. But the defendant

has failed to repay the EMI has agreed upon inspite of

repeated request of the plaintiff and regularized the account.

Thus, the loan account of the defendant slipped to NPA.

Inspite of demand and request defendant failed to clear the

dues.    However, the defendant has executed on demand

promissory note and take delivery letter.   The defendant is

due of Rs.3,10,913-68/- as on 07.11.2020 along with interest

at 12.10% from 20.10.2020 to 07.11.2020.


    3.     The defendant also plaintiff bank for grant of loan

of OD facility of Rs.1,00,000/- towards working capital of her

existing business and the plaintiff bank granted the OD

Rs.1,00,000/- and the defendant on the hypothication of

machine and defendant has availed SOD of Rs.1,00,000/- on

18.02.2017 which tenable for a period of one year, renewable

thereafter by regularizing the account. In this regard

defendant has executed necessary loan document agreeing to

repay the loan on demand together with interest at the rate of
                                 4               OS.No.5560/2020
10.60%     p.a     compounded   monthly   for   value   received.

Defendant agreed to pay the over due interest at the rate of

2% p.a. in default in payment of loan.


     4.     Though the defendant has availed the OD facility

but has not brought the OD account in order within one year

and promising to operate the OD account briskly and to bring

the OD account in order but has failed and defendant has

executed fresh promissory note on 08.02.2019 and take

delivery letter.


     5.     The defendant is due to pay a sum of Rs.79,490-

31/- and interest from 01.11.2020 to 07.11.2020 at the rate

of 12.25% p.a Rs.186-31 total 79,490-31.         The defendant

failed to clear the outstanding dues.     Hence, the plaintiff

bank issued notice demanding the defendant to clear the

entire outstanding dues.


     6.     The defendant is liable to pay interest at the rate

of 12.10% p.a compounded monthly including penal interest

at the rate of 2% p.a on term loan and also liable to pay

interest at 12.25% p.a on OD account along with penal

interest from 08.11.2020 till the date of payment.
                                    5                     OS.No.5560/2020
    7.      The cause of action for the suit arose on

19.02.2016. When the 1st installments commence in respect

of term loan and on 08.02.2019 when the defendant executed

fresh demand promissory note and take delivery letter

confirming the execution of fresh demand promissory note

and on 18.03.2019 when the defendant made last payment.


    8.      In respect of OD account when defendant availed

the OD facility on 18.02.2017 executed loan documents and

on 08.02.2019 when the defendant executed fresh demand

promissory note and take delivery letter confirming the

execution of fresh demand promissory note. Hence, the suit.


    9.      The suit summons issued to the defendant,

returned unserved. The plaintiff             bank got issued the

summons by substitute service through paper publication,

but the defendant remained absent and placed exparte.


    10.     In order to prove the case of the plaintiff bank, the

Senior    Branch   Manager    of       the   plaintiff    bank   namely

Vijayaraj.K.P himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked the

documents at Ex.P1 to P15 and thereafter the matter was

posted for arguments.
                                  6              OS.No.5560/2020
     11.    Heard the arguments of the plaintiff bank.


     12.    The points that would arise for my consideration
are : -

            1) Whether the plaintiff bank proves that
               the defendant has borrowed the loan?

            2) Whether plaintiff bank proves          that
               defendant availed OD facility?

            3) Whether the plaintiff Bank is entitled to
               the relief sought for ?

            4) What order or decree?

     13.    My findings on the above points are as under:-

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

                         R E A S ON S

     14.    Point No.1 to 3 :- Since these points are inter-

related each other then they are hereby discussed commonly

in order to avoid repetition of facts.

     15.    The plaintiff bank has filed this suit against the

defendant for recovery of the loan amount. The plaintiff bank

submits that, the defendant has availed term loan of

Rs.5,00,000/- on 19.02.2016 from the plaintiff bank for

expansion of business by        hypothication of machinery by
                                    7               OS.No.5560/2020
executing loan documents and the plaintiff bank has

sanctioned the said loan in favour of the defendant.                The

defendant agreeing to repay the loan in monthly installments

10,972/- with interest at the @ 11.4% p.a. compounded 2%

p.a in default of repayment of the loan. But the defendant

failed to clear the loan inspite of repeated request and

demand made by the plaintiff.           Defendant has executed on

demand promissory note and take delivery letter.                    The

defendant is due Rs.3,10,913-68/- in terms of loan account

along with interest @ 12.10% from 20.10.2020 to 7.11.2020.

    16.    It is further contended that the defendant also

approached the plaintiff bank for grant of loan of OD facility

of Rs.1,00,000/- towards working capital of her existing

business    and       the   plaintiff   bank   granted     the      OD

Rs.1,00,000/- and the defendant on the hypothication of

machine    and    defendant       has    availed   OD    facility    of

Rs.1,00,000/- on 18.02.2017 which tenable for a period of

one year, renewable thereafter by regularizing the account.

In this regard defendant has executed necessary loan

document agreeing to repay the loan on demand together

with interest at the rate of 10.60% p.a compounded monthly

for value received.
                                8              OS.No.5560/2020
    17.    The defendant has due of Rs.79,490-31/- as on

07.11.2020 from 01.11.2020 @ 12.25% p.a.


    18.    In support of the case of the plaintiff bank, the

Senior Branch Manager namely Vijayaraj.K.P. has filed

affidavit in   lieu of her examination-in-chief as PW.1 by

reiterating the contents of the pleadings and has relied upon

the documents, i.e., Term loan executed by the defendant

marked at Ex.P.1, The common deed hypotication of movable

executed by defendant marked at Ex.P2, Take delivery of

demand    promissory    note   marked   at   Ex.P3,   Demand

promissory note executed by the defendant marked at Ex.P4,

the statement of account of term loan of defendant marked

at Ex.P5. The letter executed by the defendant with respect

to seeking of over draft facility marked at Ex.P6 and demand

promissory note executed by defendant request for over draft

facility on 18.02.2017 marked at Ex.P7. Take delivery letter

executed by the defendant marked at Ex.P.8. The common

deed of hypotication of movables executed by the defendant

marked at Ex.P9. The letter of confirmation of fresh demand

promissory note executed by the defendant on 08.02.2019

marked at Ex.P.10.     Demand Promissory note executed by

the defendant on 08.02.2019 marked Ex.P.11. Take delivery
                               9               OS.No.5560/2020
letter executed by the defendant on 08.02.2019 marked at

Ex.P.12.   The statement of OD account of the defendant

maintain by the plaintiff bank Marked at Ex.P.13. Copy of

the demand notice issued to the defendant on 02.11.2020

marked at the Ex.P.14. RPAD receipt marked at Ex.P.15.


    19.    From the evidence of PW.1 and the documents

relied at Ex.P1 to 12, it reveals that the defendant has

borrowed the term    loan of Rs.5,00,000/- for expansion of

business    by   executing    necessary    documents      and

hypothication agreement at Ex.P2 by agreeing to the terms

and conditions of the loan. But the defendant did not repay

the loan amount as agreed.    Further defendant availed OD

facility of Rs.1,00,000/- towards working capital for her

existing business by executing D.10 to 12 agreeing to repay

the loan together with interest but the defendant has default

in repayment of the loan for which the plaintiff bank issued a

legal notices to the defendant calling upon to repay the said

amount, which evidence from Ex.P.14, inspite of service of

notice the defendant, but the defendant did not come forward

to repay the loan amount. From Ex.P5-statement of account,

it reveals that the defendant is due in a sum of Rs.3,07,447/-

as on 04.11.2020 to the plaintiff bank. From Ex.P.13 reveals
                                 10               OS.No.5560/2020
that the defendant has due of Rs.65,431/- in OD account as

on 07.11.2020.


    20.     The evidence of PW.1 and the documents at Ex.P1

to P.15 are remained unchallenged and hence, an inference

can be drawn that the plaintiff bank is entitled to the suit

claim amount of Rs.3,10,913-68/- with respect to loan

amount and also due sum of Rs.79,490-31/- with respect to

OD account in total the defendant due sum of Rs.3,80,403-

99/- as on filing of suit along with interest. When the

defendant did not enter into witness box to give her evidence

an adverse inference can be drawn against her. In this aspect

there is a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in

1999 (3) SCC 573 Vidhyadhar Vs. Manik Rao, wherein

their lordship has held that, "Evidence Act, 114, 111(g) -

Presumption - If party abstain from entering the witness box

an adverse inference would arise against him". As such an

adverse inference can be drawn that the plaintiff bank has

proved that he is entitled for the relief sought in the plaint.

    21.     So far as future interest is concerned, the plaintiff

bank has claimed future interest at the rate of 12.25% p.a.

on outstanding balance amount from the date of suit.

Considering the facts and circumstances, the defendant avoid
                               11               OS.No.5560/2020
the loan for business purpose and agree to repay the same

along with interest at the rate of 11.40% p.a. and penal

interest at the rate of 2% as such the defendant is liable to

pay the interest at the rate of 12.10% on Rs.3,10,913-68/-

and also liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12.25% p.a

on 79,490-31/- from the date of suit till realization. In the

light of the above discussion, I hold point No.1 to 3 in the

affirmative.

    22.    Point No.3:- In view of the above discussion, I
proceed to pass the following order:-
                         ORDER

The suit of the plaintiff Bank is hereby decreed with cost.

The defendant is hereby directed to pay the suit sum of Rs.3,80,404/- along with future interest at the rate of 12.10% p.a. on the loan amount of Rs.3,10,913/- and at 12.25% on OD account of Rs.79,490/- the date of suit till realization within three months from the date of decree to the plaintiff bank.

Draw a decree accordingly.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, typed by him, the transcript thereof corrected and then pronounced by me, in open court, on this the 6th day of January, 2022).

(Kengabalaiah), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

12 OS.No.5560/2020

ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for plaintiff:

P.W.1 Vijayaraj.K.P. List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:

Ex.P1 Term loan executed by the defendant Ex.P2 Common deed hypotication of movables Ex.P3 Take delivery of demand promissory note Ex.P4 Demand promissory note Ex.P5 Statement of account of term loan Ex.P6 Letter executed by the defendant for OD facility.
Ex.P7 Demand promissory note executed by the defendant on 18.02.2017 Ex.P.8 Take delivery note executed by defendant Ex.P9 Common deed of hypothication of movables executed by the defendant Ex.P10 The letter of confirmation of fresh demand promissory note executed by the defendant on 08.02.2019. Ex.P11 The demand promissory note executed by the defendant on 08.02.2019 Ex.P12 Take delivery note executed by the defendant on 08.02.2019 Ex.P.13 Statement of OD account of defendant Ex.P.14 Demand notice issued to the defendant Ex.P.15 RPAD receipt List of witnesses examined for defendant:
Nil List of documents exhibited for defendant:
Nil XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.