Bangalore District Court
Canara Bank vs Prakash on 21 April, 2025
KABC020202682023
Form No.9 (Civil)
Title sheet for
Judgment in Suits
(R.P.91)
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. JUDGE AND MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU
(SCCH-18)
Dated : This the 21st day of April 2025
Present: DHANESH MUGALI
B.Com., LL.B.,(Spl.)
III ADDL. JUDGE &
MEMBER, MACT
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BENGALURU.
S.C. No.649/2023
Plaintiff CANARA BANK,
(Erst while Syndicate Bank)
N.R.Road Branch,
New City complex market,
3rd floor, N.R.Road,
Bengaluru - 560002.
Represented by its Manager,
Mrs. Sona.P
D/o Mr. P.P Venugopalan.
aged about 36 years,
(By (Pleader Sri. G. Mallesha Raju )
V/s
Defendant Sri. Prakash
S/o Sri.Karakaiah,
SCCH-18 2 S.C.649/2023
R/at No.27, 16th cross,
Malagala, Nagarabhavi,
2nd stage, Bengaluru-560091.
(Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit 14-07-2023
Nature of the suit (suit on Money recovery
pronote, suit for declaration
and possession, suit for
injunction etc.)
Date of commencement of 28.03.2025
recording of the evidence
Date on which the judgment is 21.04.2025
pronounced
Years Month/s Days
01 09 07
(Dhanesh Mugali)
III Addl. Judge,
Court of Small Causes,
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff Bank has filed this suit through its Manager against defendant, for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,71,028.26/- along with interest @ 10.05% p.a. from the date of the suit till its realization and with costs.
SCCH-18 3 S.C.649/2023The brief facts of the Plaintiff's case are as under;
2. It is stated that, the Plaintiff is a banking company. The defendant had approached the Plaintiff bank for Hypothication loan for purchasing Auto rickshaw. Considering the request of the defendant, the Plaintiff bank had sanctioned a loan of Rs.1,20,000/- on 07-11-2012 at the rate of interest 10.05% p.a. In this connection the defendant had executed an agreement in favour of said bank and agreed to repay the loan in equal monthly installments with interest at 10.05% p.a. It is further stated that, the defendant became irregular in repayment of loan installments and has connected default in the repayment of the loan. As per statement of account, the defendant is outstanding balance of Rs.1,71,028.26/- Hence, the plaintiff bank got issued legal notice to the defendant on 26-09-2022 calling upon him to repay the liability with interest. The defendant refused to receive the RPAD cover which contained legal notice copy. Hence, the plaintiff bank has constrained to file this suit.
3. After registration of the suit, this court issued summons to the defendant through court and RPAD. But, summons was not served, as "door locked"
Thereafter, the plaintiff took summons by way of substitute service through paper publication in English SCCH-18 4 S.C.649/2023 daily news paper by name " Indian Express " dated 04- 01-2025. Inspite of publication of summons through paper publication, the defendant did not appear before the court, remained absent. Hence he was placed exparte.
4. The plaintiff bank in order to prove its case, got examined its Manager as PW1 and got marked documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 and Ex.P8(a).
5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the plaintiff & perused the materials available on record.
6. The Points that would arise for my consideration are as follows:
POINTS
1. Whether the plaintiff bank proves that, on 07-11-2012 the defendant had availed Hypothication loan of Rs.1,20,000/-, for purchasing Auto rickshaw and failed to pay the due amount of Rs.1,71,028.26?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
3. What Order or Decree?
7. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.2 : Partly in the Affirmative.
SCCH-18 5 S.C.649/2023
Point No.3: As per the final order,
for the following:
REASONS
8. POINT No.1: The Plaintiff bank in order to
prove its case, got examined its Manager Sri.
Adimaheshwara Yadav.L, as PW.1. He has filed affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief, wherein he has reiterated all the averments made in the plaint.
9. On going through the documents placed by the plaintiff bank which reveals that, Ex.P1 is the authorization letter, Ex.P2-Transfer letter, Ex.P3 -Loan application, Ex.P4 - Loan Sanction letter, Ex.P5 is the Hypothication agreement deed. All these documents evident that, before institution of the suit the defendant approached the Plaintiff bank for Hypothication loan for purchasing Auto rickshaw. By considering the request of the defendant, the Plaintiff bank has sanctioned the loan of Rs.1,20,000/- with interest @ 10.05% in equal 60 installments. Ex.P5 discloses that, the defendant has executed hypothication deed of agreement in respect of Auto rickshaw. Ex.P9 is Bank account statement of defendant wherein it discloses that, the defendant is overdue of Rs.1,71,028.26/-. Ex.P10 is certificate filed under section 2(A) of Banker's SCCH-18 6 S.C.649/2023 book evidence Act. Ex.P6 is the legal notice dated 26.09.2024 issued by the plaintiff bank calling upon the defendant to pay the due amount. Ex.P7 is postal receipt, Ex.P8 is the returned RPAD cover. Inspite of issuance of notice, the defendant failed to pay the due amount. The recitals of the documentary evidence placed by the plaintiff, remained unquestioned and uncontroverted by the other side.
10. No doubt, in the case on hand, the conduct of the defendant gives clear access to draw adverse inference against him, as contemplated under section 114 of Evidence Act. Further, the plaintiff bank has placed cogent and convincing evidence to prove the loan transaction and out standing loan amount. Accordingly, I am answering the point No.1 in the Affirmative.
11. POINT No.2: The above suit is filed for recovery of balance due amount of Rs.1,71,028.26/- with interest at the rate of 10.05% p.a. with compounded interest from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization. While answering the Point No.1 it is held that, the defendant has availed the hypothication loan of Rs.1,20,000/- from the Plaintiff bank and agreed to pay the interest @10.05%. As per SCCH-18 7 S.C.649/2023 Ex.P9 the defendant has to repay the loan amount of Rs.1,71,028.26/- including interest. Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay out standing amount of Rs.1,71,028.26/-.
12. The plaintiff's bank has sought interest at the rate of 10.05% p.a. The defendant has taken the hypothication loan. The Plaintiff bank is Nationalized bank and governed by R.B.I, rules and regulations including interest rate. Apart from this, the defendant has personally agreed to repay the loan with interest at the rate of 10.05% p.a. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff's bank is entitled to relief for recovery of Rs.1,71,028.26/- with interest at the rate of 10.05% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till its realization. Hence, I have answered Point No.2 Partly in the Affirmative.
13. POINT No.3: In the light of my due discussions on point No. 1 & 2, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Suit of the plaintiff is hereby partly decreed with cost.SCCH-18 8 S.C.649/2023
The defendant is liable to pay due amount of Rs.1,71,028.26/- along with interest at 10.05% per annum to the Plaintiff, from date of suit till its realization within two months from the date of this Order.
Failing which, the plaintiff bank is at liberty to recover the decreetal amount from the defendants through due process of law. Draw the decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court this the 21st day of April 2025) (DHANESH MUGALI) III ADDL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for plaintiff:
PW1 Sri. Adimaheshwara Yadav.L List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:
Ex.P1 : Authorization letter, Ex.P2 : Transfer letter, Ex.P3 : Loan application, Ex.P4 : Loan sanction letter, Ex.P5 : Hypothication Deed, SCCH-18 9 S.C.649/2023 Ex.P6 : Notice, Ex.P7 : Postal receipt, Ex.P8 : Returned RPAD cover, Ex.P8(a) : Copy of notice Ex.P9 : Bank Statement Ex.P10 : Certificate under Bankers Evidence Act.
List of witnesses examined for defendant:
- NIL --
List of documents exhibited for defendant:
-- NIL --
(DHANESH MUGALI) III ADDL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU.