Bangalore District Court
Bank Of Baroda (Earlier Dena Bank) vs Sri.Shantha Kumar on 13 April, 2023
KABC020149892020
IN THE COURT OF XIII ADDL. SMALL CAUSES AND
ACMM AND ADDL. MACT., BENGALURU,
(SCCH-15)
PRESENT: Smt. KUMARI SUJATHA.
B.Com., LL.B.,
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge,
ACMM,Court of Small Causes &
Member, MACT15, Bengaluru.
Small Cause No.876/2020
Dated : This the 13th day of April, 2023
Plaintiff: Bank of Baroda (Earlier Dena Bank)
A Body Corporate constituted by
and under the banking Companies
(Acquisition and Transfer of
Undertakings) Act, 1970,
having Head Office situated at
Baroda Bhavan,
R C Dutt Road, Alkapuri,
Vadodara, Gujarat State and
interalia branch office at
Peenya Branch, Bangalore
Represented by its Chief Manager & PA
Holder
Mr.Sanjay Wali, S/o Shivaputra Wali,
Aged about 38 years.
(By Sri. Nagaraja Damodara., Advocate)
V/s
SCCH 15 2 SC 876/2020
Defendants 1. Sri.Shantha Kumar,
Since Dead by his Legal Heir
1(a). Smt.Pushpa,
Aged: Major
W/o. Late Shantha Kumar
R/at # 60/1, 11th Cross, Bhovi Palya,
M.L. Puram,
Bangalore560 086.
(Exparte)
Date of Institution of suit : 08.10.2020
Nature of suit : Recovery of money
Date of Recording of evidence : 10.04.2023
Date of Judgment : 13042023
Total duration : Year/s Month/s Day/s
02 06 05
(Smt. Kumari Sujatha.)
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge
& ACMM, Court of Small causes,
Member, MACT-15, Bengaluru.
: JUDGMENT :
This is a Suit filed by the Plaintiff bank against the Defendants for recovery of Rs.1,49,229.95/ with interest at the rate of 9.95% per annum from 22.09.2020 till its realization.
SCCH 15 3 SC 876/2020
2. The factual matrix of plaint in nutshell is as under: The Central Government of India vide its Extraordinary Gazette Notification dated 02.01.2019 formed and promulgated the Scheme called "the Amalgamation of Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank with Bank of Baroda Scheme, 2019." Hence, present Suit is instituted in the name of Bank of Baroda.
The Defendant has availed vehicle loan facility of Rs.1,25,000/ by executing necessary documents on 22.06.2012 under loan account No.073354023987. The borrower agreed to repay the loan amount within 57 months, monthly installments of Rs.2,200/ each along with interest @ 12.50% p.a. with monthly rests (starts after moratorium of 03 months). But, subsequently, the Defendant No.1 has failed to repay the said loan amount and became chronic defaulter. On repeated requests and demand made by the Plaintiff bank, the Defendant did not repay the dues. Therefore, the Plaintiff bank has constrained to file the Suit for recovery of SCCH 15 4 SC 876/2020 amount with interest from the date of suit till the date of realisation.
3. In pursuance of service of suit summons, the Defendant did not appear before the Court. Hence, he was placed exparte. Thereafter, on the death of Defendant, his LR i.e., his wife was brought on record as Defendant No.1(a). Accordingly, amendment was carried out and Amended Plaint was furnished.
4. Heard arguments. Perused the materials available on record.
5. Now the Point arises for the determination of this Court are as under :
1) Whether the Plaintiff bank proves that the Defendant has borrowed vehicle loan of Rs.1,25,000/ from it and agreed to repay the same with interest at the rate of 12.50% p.a. with monthly rests?SCCH 15 5 SC 876/2020
2) Whether the Plaintiff bank further proves that the Defendant has failed to repay the amount as agreed?
3) Whether the Plaintiff bank proves that it is entitled for an amount of Rs.1,49,229.95/ with interest at the rate of 9.95% per annum from the Defendant?
4) Whether the Plaintiff bank is entitled for the relief as sought for?
5) What Order or Decree?
6. In order to substantiate the case of the Plaintiff bank, its Chief Manager by name Jyothi Saraswathi got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked 7 documents as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 and closed her side evidence. Since the Defendants were placed exparte, there was no Defendants side evidence.
7. Having heard the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff and upon perusal of depositions and documents exhibited and materials available on record, my SCCH 15 6 SC 876/2020 findings to the above Points are as under :
Point No. 1 : In the Affirmative, Point No. 2 : In the Affirmative, Point No. 3 : In the Affirmative, Point No. 4 : In the Affirmative, Point No. 5 : As per the final order for the following, REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 4: All these points are taken together for common discussion as they are inter linked with each other and to avoid the repetition of facts.
It is the case of the Plaintiff bank that, the Defendant No.1 availed vehicle Loan facility of Rs.1,25,000/, by executing necessary documents on 22.06.2012 under loan A/c No.073354023987. The Defendant No.1 had agreed to repay the said amount with interest @ 12.50% p.a. and repayable in 57 EMIs of Rs.2,200/ each and executed necessary documents in favour of the Plaintiff bank. But, subsequently, the Defendant No.1 has failed to repay the said SCCH 15 7 SC 876/2020 loan amount with interest and became chronic defaulter.
9. In order to substantiate the case of the Plaintiff bank, it has examined its Chief Manager by name D.Jyothi Saraswathi as P.W.1 and she got marked 7 documents as per Ex.P1 to Ex.P7.
10. P.W.1 has filed her chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination and reiterated the Plaint averments in her chief affidavit. Ex.P.1 is the Loan Application. Ex.P.2 is the Loan Sanction Letter. Ex.P.3 is the D.P.Note. Ex.P.4 is the Hypothication agreement. ExP5 is the Letter of General lien. ExP6 is the 'B' Register extract. ExP7 is the Statement of Account with Certificate.
11. Upon going through Ex.P1 i.e., Loan application, it shows that the Defendant had approached the Plaintiff bank for Vehicle Loan facility to the extent of Rs.1,25,000/. Ex.P.2 i.e., Sanction letter, it shows that the Plaintiff bank has sanctioned Loan to the Defendant for a sum of Rs.1,25,000/ and it also shows the agreed rate of interest shows at 12.50% p.a. and the terms of repayment of said loan at 57 EMIs for SCCH 15 8 SC 876/2020 Rs.2,200/ per month. Ex.P.3 is the On Demand Promissory note executed by the Defendant Shantha Kumar. Ex.P.4 is the Hypothication agreement executed by the Defendant in favour of the Plaintiff bank by hypothicating the vehicle. Ex P5 is the General Lien. ExP6 is the B Register extract in respect of vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA02AC5821 which stands in the name of deceased Defendant Shantha Kumar and ExP7 is the Statement of accounts with Certificate.
12. In order to rebut the evidence of PW.1, neither the Defendant appeared before the Court nor subjected PW.1 for crossexamination. The documentary evidence produced by the Plaintiff bank shows about the sanction of Loan for vehicle purchase and also Bank statement extract shows failure of the Defendant to repay the said amount.
13. It is pertinent to note here that, Ex.P7 is the Statement of Account which carries presumption under Sec. 4 of the Banker's Book Evidence Act, 1891.
Sec. 4 of Banker's Book Evidence Act, 1891 reads as thus :
Mode of Proof of Entries under Banker's Book SCCH 15 9 SC 876/2020 " Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Certified copy of any entry in a Banker's Book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where, and to the same extent as, the original entry itself is now by law admissible , but not further or otherwise".
In view of the presumption available under Section 4 of the Banker's Book Evidence Act, 1891, the entries in books of accounts produced by the bank carries presumption and testimony of P.W.1 corroborates with it and it is sufficient to prove loan transaction.
14. Therefore, the Plaintiff Bank has proved its case by adducing both oral as well as documentary evidence.
Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 to 4 in the "Affirmative."
15. Point No.5 : As per my detailed discussion as stated supra and in view of my answer to the Point No.1 to 4 "In the Affirmative", I proceed to pass the following: SCCH 15 10 SC 876/2020 ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost.
The Defendant No.1(a) is hereby directed to pay Rs.1,49,229.95/ along with interest @ 9.95% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of realization.
Failing which, the Plaintiff is at liberty to recover the same through due process of law.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13th day of April, 2023) (Smt. Kumari Sujatha.) XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge & ACMM, Court of Small causes, Member, MACT-15, Bengaluru.
SCCH 15 11 SC 876/2020ANNEXURE
1. Witnesses examined for the Plaintiff:
P.W.1 : D. Jyothi Saraswathi
2. Documents marked for the Plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 : Loan application
Ex.P.2 Loan sanction letter
Ex.P.3 : DP note
Ex.P.4 : Hypothication agreement
Ex.P.5 : Letter of general lien
Ex.P.6 : B Register extract
Ex.P.7 : Statement of account extract with
certificate
3. Witnesses examined for the Defendant: Nil
4. Documents marked for the Defendants: NIL (Smt. Kumari Sujatha.) XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge & ACMM, Court of Small causes, Member, MACT-15, Bengaluru.