Bangalore District Court
Canara Bank vs Raghu.A.S on 2 November, 2022
IN THE COURT OF LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY (CCH.NO.59)
Dated, this the 2nd day of November, 2022.
PRESENT
Sri.N.Krishnaiah, B.Sc., LL.B.,
LVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH-59),
Bengaluru City.
O.S.NO.3716/2020
PLAINTIFF Canara Bank,
Peenya 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru,
Represented by its GPA Holder
and Offficer,
Sri.Suresh Dhaduti,
S/o Late P.S..Dhaduti,
Aged about 53 years.
(By Sri.T.M.R., Advocate)
V/S
DEFENDANT: Raghu.A.S.,
S/o Sannabuddaiah,
Aged about 29 years,
Residing at Koddegahalli,
Chikkagollarahatti,
Bengaluru - 560 091.
(Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit : 20.08.2020
Nature of the suit (suit on pronote, Money Suit
suit for declaration and possession
suit for injunction, etc) :
2
O.S.No.3716/2020
Date of the commencement of 29.09.2022
recording of the evidence :
Date on which the Judgment was 02.11.2022
pronounced :
Total duration Year/s Month/s Day/s
02 02 14
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff bank has filed this suit against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.3,35,363/- with current and future interest at the rate of 10.50% per annum compounded monthly plus penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum from the date of the suit till realization and for the cost of the suit, in the ends of justice.
2. The brief facts in nut-shell of the case of the plaintiff is that, on 31.03.2016, the defendant has approached the plaintiff bank for sanction of LHV SRTO loan under Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana Scheme and sought for loan of Rs.1,85,000/- for the purpose of purchasing Atul Gem Cargo XL pick up three wheeler. The plaintiff bank has sanctioned a sum of Rs.1,85,000/-. The defendant has 3 O.S.No.3716/2020 agreed to the terms and conditions specified thereto. He was required to remit EMI of Rs.7,159/- per month for 36 months commencing from July 2016. Accordingly, the defendant has executed necessary standing instructions in the prescribed format. He has also executed a deed of Hypothecation, letter of undertaking and agreed to repay the loan with interest at the rate of 11.30% per annum compounded monthly. But, subsequently, the defendant has failed to comply with the terms of the loan repayment and failed to clear the loan in spite of repeated requests and demands. Accordingly, as on the date of the suit, the defendant is liable to pay R.3,35,363/-. In spite of issuance of legal notice dated 20.02.2020, the defendant has not paid any amount. Therefore, without any alternative, the plaintiff bank was forced to present this suit for recovery of the said amount.
3. In spite of service of summons, the defendant did not appear before this court. Hence, he was placed 4 O.S.No.3716/2020 exparte and hence, the matter was posted for plaintiff's evidence.
4. In order to prove its claim, the Assistant Manager of the plaintiff bank got examined himself as P.W-1 and he has produced 16 documents and got marked as Ex.P.1 to 16 and closed his side. Since the defendant placed exparte, cross examination of PW-1 was taken as nil and the matter was posted for arguments.
5. In view of the aforesaid contentions, the following points that would arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of suit claim of Rs.3,35,363/- ?
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for current and future interest at the rate of 10.50% per annum compounded monthly with 2% penal interest?
3. What order or decree?
6. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the materials placed on record. 5
O.S.No.3716/2020
7. My findings on the above points are as under: -
POINT NO.1 - Affirmative.
POINT NO.2 - Partly Affirmative.
POINT NO.3 - As per final order,
for the following:-
REASONS
8. POINT NOS.1 AND 2: Since both points are
interlinked, with each other, they are taken up together, for discussion, in order to avoid repetition of facts and evidence.
9. In order to prove its claim, the Assistant Manager and authorized person of the plaintiff bank, during the course of his evidence has filed an affidavit in the form of his chief examination as PW-1. In his affidavit he has reiterated the entire plaint averments in toto. In support of his oral evidence, he has produced authorization letter, Identity card, Loan application form, Loan sanction letter, Deed of Hypothecation, letter of undertaking, Irrevocable mandate form, Particulars of vehicle hypothecated, letter of 6 O.S.No.3716/2020 execution of documents, B-register extract, Copy of legla notice, postal receipt and acknowledgment, Account statement, Certificate under bankers book Evidence Act, letter of revival and got marked as Ex.P.1 to 16.
10. So. on perusal of the entire pleadings, oral and documentary evidence placed by the plaintiff bank, it is evident that, the defendant has availed loan of Rs.1,85,000/- by executing loan agreements and other documents and he has agreed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the loan facility. The defendant has hypothecated his vehicle in favour of the plaintiff bank by executing Hypothecation agreement. Ex.P.3 is the loan application form submitted by the defendant. Ex.P.4 is the loan sanction letter issued by the plaintiff bank. Ex.P.5 is deed of Hypothecation, Ex.P.6 is letter of undertaking, Ex.P.7 is irrevocable mandate form, Ex.P.8 is particulars of vehicle hypothecated, Ex.P.9 is letter of execution of documents, Ex.P.10 is B-register extract. But, subsequently, the defendant has failed to repay the installments agreed 7 O.S.No.3716/2020 by him. In spite of several requests and demands and also issuance of legal notice at Ex.P.11 to 13, the defendant has not cleared the said loan. As per Ex.P.14 statement of account, as on the date of the suit, the defendant is liable to pay total sum of Rs.3,35,363/-. Therefore, the oral evidence of PW-1 is corroborated with these documents Ex.P.1 to 16 and succeeded to prove that the defendant is liable to pay the suit claim of Rs.3,35,363/- with interest.
11. However, with regard to current and future interest is concerned, the plaintiff bank is claiming interest at the rate 10.50% per annum compounded monthly with penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum. But, admittedly, the said loan is a personal loan and it is not a commercial loan. Therefore, considering the nature of the loan and in view of the provision of section 34 of CPC, the plaintiff bank is entitled for current and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Accordingly, the plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of suit claim of Rs.3,35,363/- with 8 O.S.No.3716/2020 interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the suit till realization.
12. It is necessary to note here that, in spite of service of notice, the defendant did not appear before this court and hence, he was placed exparte. Therefore, absolutely, there is no material placed before this court to disbelieve the oral and documentary evidence placed by the plaintiff bank. On the other hand, the plaintiff bank has produced sufficient oral and documentary evidence and succeeded to prove that, he is entitled for the relief as prayed for in this suit. In view of the above reasons, I answer the point No.1 in the affirmative and point No.2 partly in the "Affirmative".
13. POINT NO.3: In the result, for the reasons stated above, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is hereby partly decreed with costs. 9
O.S.No.3716/2020 The plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of the suit claim of Rs.3,35,363/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the defendant, from the date of the suit till realization.
Draw decree accordingly. (Dictated to the Judgment Writer transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2nd day of November, 2022) (N.KRISHNAIAH) LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59) BENGALURU CITY.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PLAINTIFF:-
P.W.1 Rohit Kumar LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PLAINTIFF:-
Ex.P.1 Authorization letter
Ex.P.2 Identity card
10
O.S.No.3716/2020
Ex.P.3 Loan application form
Ex.P.4 Loan sanction letter
Ex.P.5 Deed of Hypothecation
Ex.P.6 Letter of undertaking
Ex.P.7 Irrevocable mandate form
Ex.P.8 Particulars of vehicle hypothecated
Ex.p.9 Letter of execution of documents
Ex.P.10 B-register Extract
Ex.P.11 Copy of legal notice
Ex.P.12 Postal receipt
Ex.P.13 Postal acknowledgment
Ex.P.14 Account statement
Ex.P.15 Certificate
Ex.P.16 Letter of Revival
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED & DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENDANT:-
- NIL -
(N.KRISHNAIAH) LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59) BENGALURU CITY.11
O.S.No.3716/2020 Judgment pronounced in open Court vide separate judgment.
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is hereby partly decreed with costs.
The plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery of the suit claim of Rs.3,35,363/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the defendant, from the date of the suit till realization.
Draw decree accordingly.
LVIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-59) BENGALURU CITY.