Bangalore District Court
M/S Karnataka Bank Ltd vs M/S Wireframe Visual on 12 November, 2021
KABC010202572019
[C.R.P. 67] Govt. of Karnataka
Form No.9 (Civil)
Title Sheet for
Judgment in Suits
(R.P.91)
IN THE COURT OF THE XIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE
AT BANGALORE [CCH.No.28]
Present: Sri. MALLIKARJUNA., B.Com., LL.M.,
XIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2021
O.S.No.4620/2019
Plaintiff/s : M/s Karnataka Bank Ltd.,
A banking company and Corporate
Body having its registered office
and Head office at Mahaveer Circle
Kankanadi, Mangalore-2 and a
Branch office among others at :
Vijayanagar Branch, Bangalore
R/by its Officer Mr.Satish J.Kamath,
Aged about 43 years.
(By Sri.SPKV ., Advocate)
-Vs -
Defendant/s : M/s Wireframe Visual,
Office at No.1611,
4th cross, 6th main,
R.P.C. Layout, Hampinagar,
Vijayanagar 2nd stage,
Bangalore-560 040
R/by its Proprietor
Sri.Ramakrishna Erurail,
2 O.S.No.4620/2019
S/o Parameshwara Herale,
Aged about 47 years,
Also at
No.387, 7th Main Road,
BEL Layout, Bharath Nagar,
Bydrahalli,
Vishwaneedam Post,
Bangalore-560 091
( Deft - Exparte)
Date of institution
of the suit : 27-06-2019
Nature of the suit
[suit on pronote, suit
for declaration and
possession, suit
for injunction] : Recovery of Money
Date of the commencement
of recording of the evidence: 30-10-2021
Date on which the
Judgment was pronounced : 12-11-2021
Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total Duration 02 04 15
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by the plaintiff's bank against the defendant for recovery of money.
2. The brief facts of the plaintiff's case are as under:
3 O.S.No.4620/2019
The defendant is a proprietorship concern and Sri.Ramakrishna Erurail is its Proprietor, is customer of plaintiff's bank. The defendant approached the plaintiff's bank for temporary overdraft facility for its business purpose. In this regard plaintiff's bank agreed for the same on 05-10-2015 allowed overdraft facility in Current Account No.1052000100079401 to the extent of Rs.1,79,051.50 and agreed to repay the overdrawn amount with interest at 19.75% per annum compounded monthly and executed necessary documents in favour of plaintiff's bank. The defendant has utilized the overdraft facility sanctioned by the plaintiff bank for its business purpose, but failed to repay the balance amount inspite of several demands and personal approaches of plaintiff's bank. Now the defendant is due to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.3,57,475/. Hence the present suit is filed, therefore prayed for decreeing the suit in favour of plaintiff's bank against the defendant directing him to pay the suit claim with current and future interest at the rate of 19.75 per annum compounded at monthly rests. 4 O.S.No.4620/2019
3. After service of summons, the defendant remained absent, hence he has been placed exparte, the case has been posted for plaintiff's evidence. That to prove the case of the plaintiff, its Manager got examined as P.W.1, and got marked 8 documents as per Ex.P-1 to P-8.
4. Heard the arguments of counsel for the plaintiff, perused the plaint, evidence and documents available on record.
5. The following points arisen for my consideration.
1. Whether the plaintiff's bank proves that defendant has availed and utilized the overdraft fecility sanctioned by the plaintiff's bank and he is liable to pay due a sum of Rs.3,57,475/- together current and future interest?
2. What order or decree ?
6. My answers to the above points are as under;
Point No.1 : In the affirmative,
Point No.2 : As per final order for
the following;
5 O.S.No.4620/2019
REASONS
7. Point No.1: It is the case of the plaintiff that, defendant is customer of plaintiff's bank approached the bank for temporary overdraft facility for its business purpose. In this regard plaintiff's bank agreed for the same on 05-10-2015 allowed overdraft facility in Current Account No.1052000100079401 to the extent of Rs.1,79,051.50 and defendant has agreed to repay the overdrawn amount with interest at 19.75% per annum compounded monthly and executed necessary documents in favour of plaintiff's bank. The defendant has utilized the overdraft facility sanctioned by the plaintiff's bank for its business purpose, but failed to repay the balance amount inspite of several demands and personal approaches of plaintiff's bank. Now the defendant is due to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.3,57,475/. The P.W.1 is the Branch Manager of plaintiff's bank in his affidavit filed in the form of examination-in-chief reiterated the plaint averments and in support of his oral contention he has relied Ex.P.1 to 8 documents. That on perusal of contents of the documents Ex.P1 is the request for temporary overdraft 6 O.S.No.4620/2019 fecility, Ex.P-2 is the Consent letter, Ex.P-3 is the On demand promissory note, Ex.P-4 is the acknowledgement, Ex.P-5 is the declaration, Ex.P-6 is the Loan revival letter, Ex.P-7 is the Statement of Account, Ex.P-8 is the Certificate , it is quite clear the defendant has approached the plaintiff's bank for overdraft facility. Accordingly, the bank considering the request of the defendant sanctioned over draft facility for the purpose of his business. Though the defendant agreed to repay the said amount with agreed rate of interest, but failed to repay the same as on the date of suit he was liable to pay due a sum of Rs.3,57,475/. Inspite of service of summons, the defendant remained absent not chosen to appear before the Court to deny the case of the plaintiff and to put up his defense. The very conduct of the defendant discloses that he has no case to make out against the plaintiff. The evidence of PW.1 and contents of Ex.P.1 to 8 documents remained unquestioned. That taking into consideration of all these facts and circumstances one point is clear that, plaintiff's bank has initially discharged the burden of defendant availing 7 O.S.No.4620/2019 overdraft facility by executing necessary documents has failed to comply the same. Therefore, the plaintiff's bank has filed this suit. Accordingly, proved their contention with cogent and convincing evidence. No reason is available to deny the same, the plaintiff's bank has proved this point. Accordingly, I have answered point No.1 in the 'affirmative'.
8 . Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost.
The defendant is directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,57,475/-(Three lakh fifty seven thousand four hundred and seventy five) only to the plaintiff's bank together with current and future interest at the rate of 19.75% per annum compounded monthly from the date of suit till realization. 8 O.S.No.4620/2019 Draw the decree accordingly.
[Dictated to the Judgment Writer directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this 12 th day of November, 2021) (MALLIKARJUNA) XIV Addl. City Civil Judge Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the plaintiff's bank:
P.W.1 : Sri.Ahok Bhat E.K. List of documents marked on behalf of the plaintiff's bank:
Ex.P1 : Request for temporary overdraft facility Ex.P-2 : Consent letter Ex.P-3 : On demand promissory note Ex.P-4 : Acknowledgement Ex.P-5 : Declaration Ex.P-6 : Loan revival letter Ex.P-7 : Statement of Account Ex.P-8 : Certificate 9 O.S.No.4620/2019 List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defendant/s:
-NIL-
List of documents marked on behalf of the defendant/s :
-NIL-
XIV Addl. City Civil Judge Bangalore.