Bangalore District Court
Andhra Bank vs M/S.R.B.Homes on 21 September, 2016
Govt. Of Karnataka
C.R.P.67] TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS
Form No.9(Civil) AT MAYOHALL UNIT, (CCH-29) BANGALORE.
Title sheet for
Judgment in suits
(R.P.91)
Present :- Present: Sri J.R.Mendonca, B.A.L, LL.B.
Dated: This the 21st day of September 2016
Original suit No.25907/2013
Plaintiff:- Andhra Bank
A Body corporate constituted under
The Banking Companies
(Acquisition and Transfer of
Undertakings) Act 1980 Having its
Head office at Dr.Pattabhi Bhavan
Secretariat Road, Saifabad,
Hyderabad. Having itsbranch at
Indiranagar, known as Indirangar
Branch, Bengaluru.
Represented Chief Manager.
(By Pleader Sri.F.Varis Ali)
V/s.
Defendant:- M/s.R.B.Homes,
No.442, 5th Main Road,
6th Cross, Teachers colony,
Koramangala,Bengaluru.
By its Proprietor Sri.NSreeram
Babu
Also at Chandra Nivas, 3rd Main
Road, Domlur Layout, Bengaluru.
Bengaluru.- 560 068.
( Exparte.)
2 O.S.No.25907/2013
Date of Institution of the suit 15.06.2013
Nature of the (Suit or pro-note, suit for Money suit.
declaration and possession, suit for
injunction, etc.)
Date of the commencement of recording of 25.07.2016
the Evidence
Date on which the Judgment was 21.09.2016
pronounced
Year/s Month/s Days
Total duration 03 03 06
****
JUDGMENT
This is a suit for recovery of Rs.1,45,509.95 together with uncharged interest from 29.09.2012 @ 17.75% p.a. with monthly rests on the suit claim from the date of suit till recovery and for costs.
2. The case of the plaintiff in brief is as under :-
The plaintiff is a banking company. The defendant represented by its Proprietor Sri.N.Sreeram Babu has opened a Current Account with the Plaintiff Bank on 27.11.2009. On the request of the Defendant the Plaintiff discounted the cheque for Rs.4,00,000/- on 03.04.2012 in the normal course of Banking business. The said cheque was returned unpaid and when the Plaintiff informed the Defendant about the return of the cheque, 3 O.S.No.25907/2013 he assured the Plaintiff Bank that he would repay the amount forthwith. But he has failed to repay the amount. The Plaintiff Bank adjusted the cheque amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the current account by giving temporary overdraft of Rs.1,66,265.95 on 23.06.2012. The Defendant has executed the demand promissory note and other necessary documents. The Defendant has agreed to repay the loan with interest at 17% p.a. with monthly rests.
The Defendant committed default in repayment of the monthly installments. The Plaintiff Bank issued a demand notice calling upon the Defendant to repay the loan. But the Defendant has not repaid the loan amount. The Defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95 with interest at 17.50% p.a. with monthly rests. Therefore, the Plaintiff has prayed to decree the suit.
3. Inspite of service of suit summons the defendant has not appeared before this Court and therefore it was placed as exparte.
4. The Chief Manger of Plaintiff Bank got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked documents as Ex.P-1 to P-9 and the side of the plaintiff was closed.
5. Heard Sri. F.Varis Ali, the Learned Counsel for the plaintiff.
4 O.S.No.25907/2013
6. The points that arise for my consideration are :-
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant has availed overdraft facility for Rs.1,66,265.95 on 23.06.2012 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 17% per annum on monthly rests?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant is due in a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95/- as on 13.06.2013 without debiting the interest from 29.09.2012?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for pendente-lite and future interest? If yes, at what rate?
4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs prayed?
5. What order or decree?
My answer to the above points are as follows :-
Point No.1 : In the affirmative. Point No.2 : In the affirmative. Point No.3 : The plaintiff is entitled for pendente-lite with future interest at the rate of 12% p.a. on half yearly rests.
Point No.4 : In the affirmative. Point No.5 :-As per the final order for the following :-5 O.S.No.25907/2013
REASONS
7. Point No.1 to 4 :- As all these points are inter- connected with each other, all the points are taken up together for consideration.
8. The Chief Manager of the plaintiff bank who got examined herself as P.W.1 has reiterated the plaint averments. Ex.P-1 is the Pronote, Ex.P2 is the dishonoured Cheque, Ex.P3 & 4 are the Bank endorsements, Ex.P5 is the letter written by the Defendant to the Plaintiff Bank, Ex.P6 is the Postal acknowledgement, Ex.P7 is the returned Postal cover and Ex.P8 and Ex.P9 are the Statement of accounts.
9. These documents show that the defendant had availed the cheque discount facility of Rs. 4,00,000/- and the said sum was adjusted by giving the temporary overdraft facility for Rs.1,66,265.95 on 23.06.2012 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 17% per annum on monthly rests. Ex.P-8 and Ex.P9 the Statement of accounts show that the defendant is due a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95 as on 13.06.2013 and the interest is debited upto 28.09.2012.
10. The case of the plaintiff is supported by the documents. The evidence of P.W.1 is not challenged. The 6 O.S.No.25907/2013 defendant has not appeared inspite of service of summons. There is no ground to disbelieve the case of the plaintiff.
11. Therefore, this Court holds that the plaintiff has proved that the defendant has availed overdraft facility for Rs.1,66,265.95 on 23.06.2012 agreeing to repay the same with interest at 17% per annum on monthly rests and the defendant is due in a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95 as on 13.06.2013 and liable to pay interest from 29.09.2012. Hence, point No.1 and 2 are answered in the affirmative.
11. The loan is availed by the Defendant for the purpose of business. The rate of interest agreed between the parties is 17% p.a. compounded on monthly rests. Considering the amount of loan availed, the purpose of the loan, granting interest at 12% p.a. on half yearly rests is reasonable. Therefore, this Court holds that the plaintiff is entitled for pendente-lite and future interest at the rate of 12% p.a. on half yearly rests. Hence, point No.3 is answered as above.
12. In view of my answers to points No.1 to 3 as above, this Court holds that the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs claimed in the plaint. Hence, the Point No.4 is answered in the affirmative.
7 O.S.No.25907/2013
13. Point No.5 :- In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following :-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is decreed with costs. The plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95 with interest at 12% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of the suit till the date of realization.
Draw up decree accordingly.
[Dictated to the Judgment-Writer, computerized transcript thereof corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 21st day of September, 2016].
[ J.R.MENDONCA ], XXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the plaintiffs :-
P.W.1 : Smt.M.Manikyeshwari
2. List of documents marked :-
Ex.P 1 : Pronote.
Ex.P 2 : Dishosnoured Cheque
Ex.P 3 &4 : Bank endorsements
Ex.P 5 Letter
Ex.P 6 Postal acknowledgement
Ex.P 7 Returned postal envelope
Ex.P 8 Statement of accounts.
Ex.P 9 Statement of accounts.
8 O.S.No.25907/2013
3. List of witnesses examined for the defendant :-
None.
4. List of documents marked for the defendant :-
Nil.
[ J.R.Mendonca ], XXVIII ACC & SJ.9 O.S.No.25907/2013
Judgment pronounced in open Court as under :-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff bank is decreed with costs.10 O.S.No.25907/2013
The plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.1,45,509.95 with interest at 12% per annum with half yearly rests from the date of the suit till the date of realization. Draw up decree accordingly.
(J.R.Mendonca), XXVIII ACC & SJ, B'luru.