Delhi District Court
Icici Bank vs . Kapil Dev on 4 September, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH. PRASHANT KUMAR,
ADJ04 (NW), ROHINI DISTRICT COURTS, DELHI.
CS No. 388/14
ICICI Bank Vs. Kapil Dev
M/s ICICI Bank Limited,
Having its registered office at,
Landmark, Race Course Circle,
Vadodara390007,
Having its branch office at,
Plot No. 7, S. D. Tower,
Sector08, Rohini,
New Delhi110085.
Through its authorized representative,
Mr. Shankar Pawar .............Plaintiff
Versus
Kapil Dev
S/o Sh. Tek Chand Dev
2172, Mahila Colony,
Chand Mohalla, Geeta Colony,
New Delhi. .......Defendant
Date of Institution of the case : 24.08.2009
Date of hearing the arguments : 04.09.2014
Date of announcing the Judgment : 04.09.2014
J U D G M E N T
1. By this Judgment, I shall pronounce the exparte final Judgment in this case.
The facts of the case filed by the plaintiff in brief are as under: CS No. 388/14 Page No. 1/4
M/s ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Kapil Dev The plaintiff is a body incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act 1956. The defendant approached and requested the plaintiff bank for grant of a loan amount of Rs. 3,27,000/ for purchase of a vehicle i.e 'INDICA/DLG' In this regard, the loan was sanctioned accordingly which was agreed by the defendant to repay alongwith interest in 59 equated installments of Rs. 7912/ each. The defendant executed credit facility application alongwith terms and conditions, deed of hypothecation etc. in favour of the plaintiff on 09.03.2007. The defendant, thereafter, purchased the vehicle i.e 'INDICA/DLG' The defendant was irregular in payment of installments and did not continue to pay the same despite sending a demand notice. Hence, this suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant.
2. The defendant was served by way of publication in Newspaper Virat Vaibhav, edition dated 24.08.2012. However, none appeared on his behalf despite being duly served. The WS was not filed by the defendant. Therefore, he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 20.03.2014.
3. In his exparte evidence, the plaintiff has examined only one witness i.e. PW1Arun Chaudhary. Plaintiff has relied upon certain documents i.e. power of attorney Ex. PW1/1, original credit CS No. 388/14 Page No. 2/4 M/s ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Kapil Dev application form Ex. PW1/2, deed of hypothecation is Ex. PW1/3, irrevocable power of attorney Ex. PW1/4, copy of demand notice is Ex. PW1/5, postal receipts are Ex. PW1/6 and statement of account dated 28.07.2009 is Ex. PW1/7.
PW1 has reiterated all the facts during his examination in chief as alleged by him in his plaint and the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity. No other witness has been examined by the plaintiff in his exparte evidence.
4. Exparte final arguments are heard at length. Record is also perused thoroughly.
5. So far as the facts alleged in the plaint are concerned, as the defendant is exparte in this case, hence, the facts alleged in the plaint and the evidence so led by the plaintiff remains uncontroverted and unrebutted. Hence, it is considered that they are duly corroborated.
With regard to the issue pertaining to the jurisdiction and limitation, I am of the considered opinion, after careful perusal of the record, that the suit has been filed within limitation of time and this court is having territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to try this case. In these circumstances, therefore, there is nothing on the record from which it can be construed contrary to the plaintiff or any CS No. 388/14 Page No. 3/4 M/s ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Kapil Dev contrary opinion can be taken against him. Thus, the evidence led by the plaintiff is to be considered accordingly.
6. In view of facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has been able to prove the case. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of Rs. 3,56,588.25/ alongwith interest (simple interest) @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realization alongwith cost of the suit.
7. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
Announced & dictated in the (Prashant Kumar)
open court today i.e. on 04.09.2014 ADJ04(NW)/Rohini Courts
Delhi/04.09.2014
CS No. 388/14 Page No. 4/4
M/s ICICI Bank Ltd. Vs. Kapil Dev