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 3]

Bombay High Court

Axis Bank Ltd vs Pfs Supplier And Anr on 3 October, 2018

Author: A.K. Menon

Bench: A.K. Menon

hcs
                                                                     6.comas26.18.odt

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      ADMIRALTY & VICE ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION


                              IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION


                     COMMERCIAL ADMIRALTY SUIT NO.26 OF 2018


      Axis Bank Ltd.                            .. Plaintiff.
               Vs.
      PFS Supplier & Anr.                .. Defendants.


      Mr.Chetan Kapadia with Ms.Anjala Parveen i/b Vidhi Partners for the
      Plaintiff.
      Ms.Mansi Jani i/b PAN India Legal Services for the Defendant No.2.


                                   CORAM : A.K. MENON, J.

DATED : 3RD OCTOBER, 2018.

P.C. :

1. The affidavit Mr.Vivek Palaniappan has been taken on record and marked Exhibit P-1. The witness has tendered a compilation of documents which includes a certified copy of the Power of Attorney granted to the witness. The compilation also contains certified extracts of the Board Resolution dated 28th July, 2015 authorising the said witness, a copy of which appears at Item No.2 in the list of documents.

The witness has also produced the original sanction letters, statements of account of the ECB loan, Overdraft Facility along with original certificates under the Banker's Book of Evidence Act, 1891, the written 1/3

6.comas26.18.odt acknowledgment of debt and the recall notice. The documents at Serial Nos.1 to 22 are taken on record and marked as Exhibit P-2 to Exhibit P-23.

2. Vide order dated 6th July, 2018 the suit was directed to be listed as an undefended suit, if the defendants failed to file written statement. Mr.Kapadia submits that the defendants have not filed their written statement. In the circumstances the contents of the plaint not being disputed and in view of deposition of the plaintiff's witness the documents being marked, the plaintiff is entitled to a decree.

3. It is submitted across the bar that vessel PFS Supplier which is seen to be mortgaged to the plaintiff's bank pursuant to mortgage deed dated 22nd February, 2010 has already been sold and the sale consideration has been deposited in this Court, as recorded by this Court in its order dated 12th February, 2018.

4. In the circumstances I pass the following order;

(a) the suit is decreed in terms of prayer clause (a)

(b) the defendants shall pay to the plaintiff a sum of USD 138,525.07 due as on 31st October, 2017 equivalent to Rs.89,69,498.28 Ps together with further simple interest at the rate of 3-M LIBOR + 3.00% per annum from 1st November, 2017 till payment or realisation.

(c) the defendants shall also pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs.6,96,95,470.03 Ps due under the overdraft facility along with 2/3

6.comas26.18.odt interest thereon at the rate of 12.2% per annum from 1st November, 2017 till payment or realisation.

(d) Defendants shall also pay costs of the suit.

5. Drawn up decree be expedited.




                                                      (A.K. MENON,J.)


               Digitally signed
  Hemant       by Hemant
               Chandersen Shiv
  Chandersen   Date:
  Shiv         2018.10.05
               15:48:34 +0530




                                   3/3