Bangalore District Court
Bank Has Filed This Suit For Recovery Of ... vs On 03.10.2019. The on 3 September, 2021
C.R.P.67] Government of Karnataka
Form No.9(Civil)
Title Sheet for
Judgment in suits
TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, (SCCH-09) AT
BANGALORE
Present: UMESHA.H.K, B.A., LL.B.,
JUDGE, Court Of Small Causes,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2021
SC. No:1585/2019
Plaintif : Canara bank,
Peenya 3rd Stage, Bangalore,
Represented by its duly constituted
GPA holder & officer
Sri. Suresh Dhaudti (Major)
S/o Late Sri. P.S.Dhaudti
(By Sri.T.Mohan Raj-Advocate)
-Vs-
Defendant : Sri. Santosh M
(Major)
S/o Sri.Manickayam,
#04, 5th Cross,
Chowdeshwarinagar, Laggere,
Bangalore-560058.
(Exparte)
SCH-9 2 SC.1585/2019
Date of Institution of suit : 29.11.2019
Nature of the suit : Recovery of money
Date of commencement of : 27.08.2021
recording of the evidence
The date of pronouncement of : 03.09.2021
Judgment
Total Duration :: Year/s Month/s Day/s
01 10 05
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff bank has filed this suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.1,77,375/- with interest @ 10.65% p.a. compounded monthly plus 2% penal interest per annum from the date of the suit till realization.
2. It is stated in the plaint the defendant had approached the plaintiff bank on 14.05.2016 requesting for sanction of LHV SRTO Loan under the Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana Scheme for the purpose of purchasing Atul Gem Cargo XL pick up three Wheeler value of Rs.2,15,500/-. As per the sanction terms & conditions, the defendant sanctioned an amount of Rs.1,81,000/- and executed Deed of Hypothecation & letter of undertaking on SCH-9 3 SC.1585/2019 20.05.2016 for the purpose availing the loan. It is further stated in the plaint that defendant has agreed to repay the said amount within 36 equal monthly installments @ Rs.6,500/- p.m., each and last installment of Rs.4,815/-. The first installment commenced from July 2016 onwards and agreed to pay interest at the rate of 11.30% p.a. compounded with monthly plus 2% penal interests per annum. Inspite of repeated demands he did not repaid the amount as agreed. Hence, without alternative plaintiff bank has issued legal notice to defendant on 03.10.2019. The defendant is due an amount of Rs.1,77,375/- to the plaintiff bank. Inspite of service of notice, failed to repay the loan amount. Hence, the suit.
3. After registering the suit, this court has issued suit summons to the defendant. Since the summons issued by this court was not served. Plaintiff bank has taken steps through paper publication. Summons was published in daily Kannada Newspaper i.e., Sumyuktha Karnataka dt.23.01.2021. Inspite of SCH-9 4 SC.1585/2019 paper publication summons defendant remained absent. Hence, placed exparte.
4. Plaintiff bank in order to prove its case, has examined one Sri.Shashi Raj, Senior Manager as PW1 and got marked 15 documents as Ex.P1 to P15.
5. Heard arguments. Perused the records.
6. The following points would arise for my consideration.
1) Whether the plaintiff bank proves that the defendant had borrowed loan of Rs.1,81,000/- , agreeing to repay the same with interest @ 12.65% compounded monthly and executed the loan documents as stated in plaint?
2) Whether plaintiff bank is entitled for relief as prayed in the suit?
3) What order or decree?
7. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative Point No.2 : In the partly affirmative Point No.3 : As per final order for the following:SCH-9 5 SC.1585/2019
REASONS
8. Point No.1 & 2: Since these two points are quite common in discussions, in order to avoid repetition of facts these two points are taken together and answered accordingly.
9. Plaintiff bank has filed this suit against defendant for recovery of loan amount. It is the case of the plaintiff bank, that defendant approached the plaintiff bank requesting loan for purchasing Atul Gem Cargo XL pick up three wheeler and availed loan of Rs.1,81,000/- agreeing to repay the same in 36 equal monthly installments of Rs.6,500/- and last installment of Rs.4,815/- commencing from July 2016 and he executed necessary documents on behalf of plaintiff bank. It is the further case of plaintiff that defendant has not repaid the loan amount as agreed. Thereafter, without alternative, plaintiff bank issued notice to the defendant. Though notice was served he did not repaid the amount as agreed. Hence, the suit.
10. In order to prove the plaint averments, plaintiff bank examined its Senior Manager as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to SCH-9 6 SC.1585/2019
11. PW.1 in lieu of his chief examination has filed chief examination affidavit as provided Under Order XVIII Rule 4 of CPC and during the course of chief examination he has reiterated the plaint averments, in detail on oath and he specifically deposed defendant is defaulter and not repaid the loan amount as agreed by him. Hence, filed the said suit for recovery without any alternative etc. Admittedly, oral evidence placed by plaintiff bank remained intact and unchallenged.
12. To substantiate oral evidence plaintiff bank has also placed Ex.P1 to 15 documents. Ex.P1 is the authorization letter. Ex.P2 is the ID card of PW.1. Ex.P3 is the certificate. Ex.P4 is the loan application, dated 14.05.2016. Ex.P5 is loan sanction letter dt: 20.05.2016. Ex.P6 is the Deed of hypothecation. Ex.P7 is the letter of undertaking. Ex.P8 is the letter evidencing execution of document. Ex.P9 is the notice. Ex.P10 is the postal receipt. Ex.P11 is the postal acknowledgment. Ex.P12 is the statement of account. Ex.P13 is the letter of revival. Ex.P14 is the B- Register extract. Ex.P15 is the paper publication. Ex.P15(a) is the SCH-9 7 SC.1585/2019 published portion. So, all these documents placed by the plaintiff bank clearly establishes that defendant availed loan purchase of Atul Gem Auto three wheeler of Rs.1,81,000/- and agreed to repay the loan amount as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement. But, as per the Ex.P12 defendant failed to repay the loan installments as agreed by him and he is a defaulter. Though plaintiff bank has issued notice as per Ex.P9, he did not turned up, nor repaid the loan amount.
13. Ex.P13 discloses on 05.12.2017 he executed letter of revival document reviving the loan, which was availed by him. As per, this document suit of the plaintiff defendant is well within time as prescribed by law. Even after executing Ex.P13 defendant failed to repay the loan amount. Admittedly, there is no contrary evidence to disbelieve the case of plaintiff. So, this court is of the opinion that plaintiff bank has proved its case by placing cogent and satisfactory evidence.
14. Plaintiff bank has claimed current and future interest on principal amount @ 10.65% and compounded monthly interest SCH-9 8 SC.1585/2019 @ 2% penal interest from the date of suit till realization. On perusal of Ex.P12 i.e., statement of accounts, pertaining to the defendant, it discloses that the plaintiff bank has already calculated the interest at agreed rate and including the said interest amount has claimed total Rs.1,77,375/-. No doubt, defendant has agreed to pay interest @ 10.65% p.a. and compounded monthly plus 2% penal interest, as per the agreement, in case of breach of terms and conditions of the agreement. Admittedly the loan availed by defendant is a commercial loan. Any how considering the present situation of COVID-19, since 1½ years, this court feels current and future interest can be granted @ 6% p.a., which would meets the ends of justice and plaintiff bank is not entitled for future and pendent lite interest as claimed in the plaint @ 10.65% on the decreed amount. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff bank is entitled to the suit claim with pendente lite and future simple interest at 6% per annum and accordingly, point No.1 is answered in the affirmative and point no.2 in the partly affirmative. SCH-9 9 SC.1585/2019 Point No.2:
15. In view of the discussion made above, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is hereby partly decreed with costs.
It is ordered and decreed that the defendant is liable pay to the plaintiff bank a sum of Rs.1,77,375/- together with interest at 6% per annum on the principal amount from the date of suit till realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer on computer directly, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this 3rd day of September 2021) (Umesha H.K.) Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of plaintif:
PW1 Shashi Raju List of documents exhibited on behalf of plaintif:
Ex.P1 Authorization letter
SCH-9 10 SC.1585/2019
Ex.P2 C/c of ID Card
Ex.P3 Certificate
Ex.P4 Loan application
Ex.P5 Loan sanction letter
Ex.P6 Deed of Hypothecation
Ex.P7 Letter of under taking
E.xP8 Letter evidencing execution of document
Ex.P9 Notice
Ex.P10 Postal receipt
Ex.P11 Postal acknowledgment
Ex.P12 Account statement
Ex.P13 Letter of revival
Ex.P14 B-Register extract report
Ex.P15 Paper publication on 07.02.2021
Ex.P15(a) Published portion
List of witnesses examined on behalf of defendant:
None List of documents exhibited on behalf of defendant:
Nil (Umesha H.K.), Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.