Bangalore District Court
The State Bank Of Mysore vs Mr. Ajaz Pasha on 1 February, 2016
IN THE COURT OF LVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H.57)
Dated: This the 1st day of February 2016
Present: Sri. K.R. NAGARAJA, B.A. L.L.B.,
LVI Addl. C.C & S.J, Bangalore.
O.S. NO.8424/2015
Plaintiff: The State Bank of Mysore, Vyalikaval
Branch, Bangalore, represented by the
Stressed Assets, Resolution Centre,
Having its Office at Annexure Building,
Behind SBM, Head Office Building, K.G.
Road, Bangalore, Represented by its City
Case Officer, Sri. Umakanth V.R., Aged
57 years.
[By Sri.Ravikumar N.G., Adv.,]
-Vs-
Defendants: Mr. Ajaz Pasha, Major, S/o Fayaz Ahmed,
R/at No.38/14, Ground Floor, Bazaar
Street, Neelasandra, Bangalore-47.
(Ex-parte)
Date of institution of the suit 05/10/2015
Nature of the suit Money Suit
Date on which the judgment was 01/02/2016
pronounced
Total duration : Days Month/s Year/s
26 03 00
2 O.S.No.8424/2015
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff bank sues recovery of Rs.5,15,865/- with current and future interest at the rate of 14.5% p.a. compounded quarterly from the date of suit till realization of same and court cost from defendant with the foundation of following material facts.
Plaintiff being a banking company constituted under State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act 1959 carrying on Business of Banking through its various branches, having its Head Office at K.G. Road Bangalore-09. Plaintiff bank submits that defendant had applied loan for Rs.5,50,000/- to purchase Swift VDI B.S.4 Car. The said loan was sanctioned and defendant was called upon to execute necessary loan papers. The defendant accepted the terms and conditions for sanction of loan. Further plaintiff bank submits that on 11/9/2014 defendant has executed Agreement of loan cum Hypothecation for sum of Rs.5,50,000/- in favour of plaintiff bank and hypothecated schedule property as collateral security and agreed to repay the said loan with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. compounded monthly rest for the value received. The defendant had undertaken to repay the said loan liability in 60 equated monthly installments of Rs.9,200/- with interest thereon. Plaintiff bank has produced statement of account pertaining to the loan 3 O.S.No.8424/2015 account of defendant under the Bankers Books Evidence Act. The defendant is liable to pay interest at 14.50% p.a. compounded monthly rest. Plaintiff bank further submits that the defendant has failed to pay the loan amount as undertaken by him inspite of repeated demands in oral and legal notice. Since the defendant failed to clear the above noted due despite of demand, the plaintiff bank constrained to sue recovery of above amount through the present suit.
2. The defendant remained absent despite of receipt of summons through in person and through paper publication respectively. This court placed defendant as exparte by order dated 4/1/2018.
3. In the light of Division Bench decision of our Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in case of Smt. Asha bi reported in ILR 2001 Kar. 546 reserved the suit on hand for pronouncement of judgment without embark upon plaintiff bank to adduce evidence.
4. Perused the papers.
5. In the light of above materials and prayer of plaintiff bank, following points fall for decision making of this court:- 4 O.S.No.8424/2015
(1) Whether the above suit claim of plaintiff bank deserves to be accorded?
(2) What order?
6. This court on appreciation of available materials with reference to prevailing legal aspects, give finding to the above points as follow:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative;
Point No.2 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1: The plaintiff bank has asserted the above
facts in its plaint. The unchallenged pleadings of plaintiff bank establish that defendant has admitted the suit claim as well supporting above noted material facts. Besides, plaintiff bank have produced the original Letter of Arrangement, Agreement of Loan Cum Hypothecation, statement of account and letter furnishing particulars of vehicle. These documents abundantly establish the existence of above supporting material facts of plaintiff bank. Above documents also establish the receipt of loan from defendant and he also agreed to repay the same as claimed by plaintiff bank. Defendant has also agreed to pay interest at the rate as claimed by 5 O.S.No.8424/2015 plaintiff bank. Account extract shows the due of defendant with plaintiff bank. The suit claim of plaintiff bank is abundantly established from the above noted document. Suit claim of plaintiff bank is within time. Suit claim is not against to any prevailing law. There are no grounds whatsoever to discard the suit claim of plaintiff bank. Hence suit claim deserves to be accorded. Accordingly, this point is answered in the affirmative.
8. POINT NO.2: In the light of finding on above point, suit of plaintiff Bank to be decreed as prayed for. In the result, this court proceeds to pass following:
O R D E R Suit is decreed with cost as prayed by plaintiff bank.
Defendant shall pay Rs.5,15,865/- with interest at the rate of 14.50% p.a. compounded quarterly from the date of suit till realization of same and court cost in favour of plaintiff bank.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 1 day of st February 2016).
(K.R. Nagaraja) LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore.6 O.S.No.8424/2015
A N N E X U R E List of witnesses examined for plaintiff:
-Nil-
List of witnesses examined for defendants:
-Nil-
List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:
-Nil-
List of documents exhibited for defendant:
-Nil-
(K.R. Nagaraja) LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore.