Delhi District Court
M/S Icici Bank Ltd vs Sh. Gopal on 22 September, 2010
In the Court of Sh. P.K. Matto, Additional District Judge,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
CS No.:-- 07/09
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 27.04.2009
DATE OF RESERVING ORDER : 22.09.10
DATE ON WHICH ORDER IS PRONOUNCED: 22.09.10
In Re:
M/s ICICI Bank Ltd,
Having its registered office at
Landmark Race Course Circle,
Vadodara-390007,
Having its Branch office at
S.D. Tower, Commercial Complex,
Sector-8, Rohihi, New Delhi-110085.
Through authorized representative
Mr. Ankur Khole.
........Plaintiff.
Vs.
Sh. Gopal,
S/o Sh. Umesh Kumar,
R/o E-323 M Street No.11
Ashok Nagar, Shahdara,
Opposite Vivekandand School,
Delhi-110093.
..........Defendant.
JUDGMENT:
1. It is a summery suit u/o 37 of the CPC. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff bank has advanced a loan of Rs.455826/- to the defendant on dated 4.2.08 for purchasing a vehicle "City 1.5 GXI". This amount of loan was to be repaid in 36 monthly installments of Rs. 16400/- each.
2. The defendant has executed certain documents viz. Preliminary credit facility, application form, credit facility application form, unattested deed of hypothication, irrevocable power of attorney, in favour of the plaintiff bank in order to secure the sanctioning of the loan and the loan agreement number of the defendant maintained by the plaintiff is LUDEL00012491314 and the plaintiff bank had disbursed the aforesaid amount to the defendant for purchasing the vehicle City 1.5 GXI and the defendant undertook to supply its the registration number on its registration with the regional transport office.
3. The vehicle of the defendant is registered with the regitration authority vide registration no. DL-3CAK-7511 and the same is hypothicated in favour the plaintiff bank in the terms of the loan documents executed between the plaintiff and the defendant.
4. It is stated by the plaintiff that the defendant had executed the following documents in favour of the plaintiff bank on 4.2.08.
(a). Credit facility application along with the terms and conditions of the loan: by virtue of this application the terms and conditions of the loan, the defendant agreed and undertook to repay the loan amount to the tune of Rs.455826/- as taken by him from the plaintiff bank in 36 equated monthly installments of Rs.16400/- each. The defendant has further agreed that in case of any installment is delayed the defendant would pay a penal interest of 24% per annum, as per the agreement entered into between the parties, on the outstanding equated monthly installment's amount. It was also agreed by the defendant that in the event of default in making the payment of installments by the defendant the plaintiff bank would be entitled to take over the possession of the vehicle financed and further the plaintiff bank may sell the same to recover the outstanding amount due and payable by the defendant, to the plaintiff bank towards the loan facility availed by him.
(b). Deed of hypothication: as per deed of hypothication, the vehicle financed to be hypothicated in the name of plaintiff bank and the bank would be entitled to take over the possession of the vehicle, in the event of default by the defendant, being the rightful owner of the same.
c. Irrevocable power of attorney: authorising the plaintiff to take over the possession of the vehicle and sell the same, to appropriate the dues, in the event of default by the defendant.
5. The defendant has failed to maintain the financial discipline and committed default in payment of installments, his several ECS instructions for repayment of loan got dishonoured and returned unpaid.
6. The plaintiff has issued a demand notice dated 8.11.08 to the defendant, which was posted on dated 12.11.08 and requested to pay the outstanding amount and to hand over the peaceful possession of the vehicle. But despite of issuance of notice, the defendant neither made the efforts to repay the outstanding amount nor handed over the vehicle to the plaintiff.
7. Feeling aggrieved with the financial indiscipline of the defendant, the plaintiff bank has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.590197.52/-paise along with interest pendente lite and future @ 17.12% per annum from the date of filing of the present suit, till the realization of the amount.
8. Plaintiff has placed reliance on the documents viz. Photocopy of power of attorney executed by the plaintiff bank authorizing Sh. Ankur Khole to sign all the documents of the plaintiff bank, preliminary original credit facility application form, credit facility application form original unattested deed of hypothication, original irrevocable power of attorney, copy of demand notice dated 8.11.08 with postal receipts in original.
9. The service of the defendant could not be affected through ordinary mode so, it is affected by way of publication in the news paper Maha Medha in its edition dated 17.8.10, but despite of his service, the defendant has failed to file his appearance, till date.
10.I have heard the ld. Counsel for the plaintiff, perused the judicial record.
11.Since it is a summery suit and the defendant has failed to file his appearance, as a necessary sequel, the averments made in the plaint are deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff is entitled to the judgment and decree forthwith, in accordance with provisions of order 37 rule 2(3) of CPC.
12.In view of the facts mentioned in the plaint, documents placed on record, submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and mandatory provisions of law as mentioned above, the suit of the plaintiff stands decreed a decree of Rs. 590197.52/- paise is hereby passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant and the plaintiff is also entitled to the cost and the interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the remaining principle amount from the date of institution of the present suit, till its realization.
13.Since vide order dated 8.5.09 Mr. Manoj Upadhyay, the representative of the plaintiff bank has already been appointed as receiver by this court, hence the order dated 8.5.09 is made absolute. As the ld. Counsel for the plaintiff namely Sh. S.K. Sharma has given statement on dated 10.9.10 that the vehicle CITY 1.5 GXI bearing regd. no. DL-3CAK-7511 could not be taken into custody. So it is clarified that whenever the vehicle will be taken into custody by the receiver, the plaintiff will be at liberty to sell the vehicle CITY 1.5 GXI bearing regd. no. DL-3CAK-7511, but in respect of the proposed sale of the vehicle, notice would be sent to the defendant 10 days in advance through regd. Post by the plaintiff, so that, if the defendant would desire to participate in the sale of the said vehicle, he may participate.
14.It is further clarified that the plaintiff would set off the amount, arising out of the sale of the above said vehicle in question.
15.Let the decree sheet be prepared and file be consigned to the record room. Pronounced in the open court.
Dated: 22.09.10 (P.K. Matto) Additional District Judge Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
#######