Bangalore District Court
Unknown vs Pradessh Kacheri S/O. Premarajan on 28 January, 2020
IN THE COURT OF XXXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE
BANGALORE CITY (CCH-40)
Dated on this the 28th day of January ,2020.
-: PRESENT :-
Sri. Khadarsab, B.A., LL.M.,
XXXIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bangalore City.
Original Suit No.674/2017
Plaintiff :
The Federal Bank Ltd., Registered Office
at Alluva, Kerala - 683 101.
Represented by its Chief Manager, The
Federal Bank Ltd., Banaswadi Branch,
No.13, Banaswadi Main Road,
Bengaluru - 56-0 043.
[By Sri.V.Viajayakumar, Advocate]
/ VERSUS /
Defendants:
Pradessh Kacheri S/o. Premarajan, 36
Years, Proprietor of M/s.Indtco
Industries, SF 79/3C2, Elango Nagar,
Avarampalayam, Coimbatore - 641 006,
Tamil Nadu.
Also At : CR 57706, 13 PO Box 11087,
Agricultural land Gudalblya Manama
Baharin.
/ 2 / O.S.No.674/2017
Also At : Kacheri House, Kakkur Post,
Nanminda, Kozhikode, Kerala - 673 619.
Also At : No.423, 1 Viranjaneyanagar,
Kolar - 563 101.
(Exparte)
: 25.01.2017
Date of Institution of the suit
Nature of suit : Money Suit
Date of commencement of : 16.04.2019
evidence
Date on which the judgment is : 28.01.2020
pronounced
Years Months Days
Duration taken for disposal :
03 00 03
***
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by the plaintiff - bank against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,27,575/- together with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. and 2% penal interest with weekly rests.
2. The case of the plaintiff - bank in brief is as follows : -
/ 3 / O.S.No.674/2017 That, the defendant is the sole proprietor of M/s.INDTCO Industries. M/s.INDTCO Industries had requested the plaintiff - bank to permit him to avail temporary overdraft loan facilities of Rs.3 Lakhs in current account No.14710200007597 on 8.4.2015 for urgent business requirements. The request of the defendant was considered by the plaintiff - bank and permitted him to avail T.O.D. facilities as requested for. The defendant had availed from the plaintiff - bank a temporary overdraft loan facilities to the above said account. In consideration of the availment of the said loan facilities the defendant had executed Demand Promissory Note for sum of Rs.3 Lakhs on 8.4.2015. The said document was delivered to the plaintiff - bank along with a security delivery letter dated 8.4.2015. In terms of the TOD the defendant had agreed to repay the said amount along with interest at rate of 20.25% p.a. with weekly rests overdue interest at the / 4 / O.S.No.674/2017 rate of 2% p.a. in case of default or such other varied rate of interest. The plaintiff availed the said loan for his commercial purpose. But, has failed to repay the said amount in time. Accordingly, the plaintiff - bank issued reminder letter on 9.8.2016. The said notice was duly served upon the defendant, but has failed to reply to the said notice and even has failed to repay the said loan amount. Hence, prayed for decreeing the suit.
3. After presentation of the suit, summons was issued to the defendant. Though the suit summons duly served on the defendant, he remained absent. Hence, the defendant placed exparte on 27.3.2017.
4. In order to prove the case of the plaintiff - bank the Senior Manager of plaintiff - bank namely Sri.Suresh Prabhu has been examined as P.W.1 and documents marked as Exs.P.1 to P.15.
/ 5 / O.S.No.674/2017
5. Heard the arguments of the plaintiff-bank.
6. On the basis of the pleadings, documents and evidence, the following points arise for my consideration:-
1) Whether the plaintiff-bank proves that the defendant borrowed an amount of Rs.3 Lakh and agreed to pay interest at the rate of 20.25 % p.a. along with penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. ?
2) Whether the plaintiff bank proves that inspite of its repeated demands the defendant failed to repay the loan amount?
3) Whether the plaintiff - bank is entitled for the suit claim?
4) What order or decree?
7. My findings to the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1 : In the affirmative. Point No.2 : In the affirmative. Point No.3 : Partly in the affirmative.
/ 6 / O.S.No.674/2017
Point No.4 : As per final order,
for the following:
REASONS
8. Point Nos.1 and 2 :- These points are
interlinked with each other. In order to avoid repetition of facts and evidence, they are taken up together for discussion.
9. It is a suit filed by the plaintiff - bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,27,575/- along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. and penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. with weekly rests from the date of suit till the date of realization. It is the specific case of the plaintiff - bank that the defendant has barrowed a loan of Rs.3 Lakh by executing Demand Promissory Note along with necessary documents. The defendant has barrowed the said amount for his business purpose. Though the defendant has barrowed the said amount, but he has failed to repay the / 7 / O.S.No.674/2017 loan amount inspite of repeated demands. Hence, the plaintiff - bank filed the present suit.
10. In order to substantiate the claim of the plaintiff - bank, the Senior Manager of the plaintiff bank has been examined as P.W.1 and has produced 15 documents i.e. Exs.P.1 to 15. Ex.P.1 is the Loan application dated 8/4/2015. Ex.P.2 is the D.P. note dated 8/4/2015.
Ex.P.3 is the Security Delivery Letter dated 8/4/2015. Ex.P.4 is the Office copy of Advocate Notice dated 9/8/2016. Exs.P.5 to 9 are 5 postal receipts. Exs.P.10 to 13 are 4 postal covers. Exs.P10(a) to 13(a) are the Postal Covers opened in the open Court and contents are marked. Ex.P.14 is the Loan Account Statement pertains to Account No.14710200007597. Ex.P.15 is the Acknowledgement issued by defendant dated 8/4/2015.
11. P.W.1 - Senior Manager of the plaintiff - bank has reiterated the contents of the plaint in his / 8 / O.S.No.674/2017 examination-in-chief affidavit. Since the defendant has remained exparte, P.W.1 has not been cross-examined with respect to the claim of the plaintiff and the testimony of P.W.1 remained unchallenged with respect to the execution of loan documents by the defendant i.e. Ex.P.2 - Demand Promissory Note dated 8.4.2015, Ex.P.3 - Security Delivery Letter dated 8.4.2015 and Ex.P.15 - Undertaking given by the defendant dated 8.4.2015.
12. Further, I have meticulously perused the documents produced by the plaintiff - bank. Ex.P.2 is the Demand Promissory Note executed by the defendant, Ex.P.3 is the Security Delivery Letter dated 8.4.2015 executed by defendant and Ex.P.15 is the Undertaking given by the defendant dated 8.4.2015. P.W.1 has categorically deposed that the defendant has executed Demand Promissory Note as per Ex.P.2, Security Delivery Letter as per Ex.P.3 and Undertaking given by the / 9 / O.S.No.674/2017 defendant dated 8.4.2015 and same have not been assailed by way cross-examination. Therefore, on the oral evidence of P.W.1, the execution of said loan documents by the defendant has been proved to the satisfaction of this Court. On cumulative reading of evidence of P.W.1 and Exs.P.2, P.3 and P.14 - Statement of Loan Account and Ex.P.15 - Undertaking given by the defendant dated 8.4.2015, it is clear that the defendant has borrowed a loan of Rs.3 Lakh under Temporary Overdraft Loan Facility Scheme from plaintiff - bank on 8.4.2015. Further, it is also manifesto from Ex.P.2 that defendant has agreed to repay the loan amount along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. The defendant is liable to pay the said interest. The testimony of P.W.1 remained unchallenged. Thus, from the oral evidence of P.W.1 and documentary evidence i.e. Exs.P.1 to P.15, the plaintiff - bank is able to show that the defendant has borrowed a loan amount of / 10 / O.S.No.674/2017 Rs.3 Lakh for his business improvement from the plaintiff - bank on 8.4.2015 and agreed to repay the said loan amount along with interest at the rate of 20.25%. Apart from this P.W.1 deposed that despite repeated demands and subsequent issuance of notice as per Ex.P.4 on 9.8.2016, the defendant has failed to repay the said loan amount and the testimony of P.W.1 remained unchallenged.
13. That, the defendant has got two opportunities to deny the claim of the plaintiff - bank, i.e., by replying to the legal notice - Ex.P.4 and second opportunity is to contest the matter by appearing in this case. But, the defendant has failed to avail these two opportunities. Hence, there is no material to reject the claim of the plaintiff - bank. On the basis of testimony of P.W.1, it can be safely held that the defendant has defaulted to repay the loan despite there being repeated demands.
/ 11 / O.S.No.674/2017 Thereafter, I answer the points No.1 and 2 in the affirmative.
14. Point No.3:- This point is framed with respect to the entitlement for the relief claimed in this suit. The plaintiff in this suit has claimed to pass a decree against the defendant for Rs.4,27,575/- with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. from the date of suit till the date of its complete realization along with penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. with weekly rests in respect of Temporary Overdraft Loan from the date of suit till the date of realization.
15. On perusal of Ex.P.2 - Demand Promissory Note it reveals that the defendant has agreed to repay the said loan amount of Rs.3 Lakhs along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. As per Section 21(A) of Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the plaintiff - bank is entitled to / 12 / O.S.No.674/2017 agreed rate of interest. Section 21(A) of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 reads thus :
"Section 21(A) : Rate of interest charged by banking companies not to be subject to scrutiny by Courts. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Usurious Loans Act 1918 (10 of 1918), or any other Law relating to indebtedness in force in any State, a transaction between a banking company and its debtor shall not be reopened by any Court on the ground that the rate of interest charged by the banking company in respect of such transaction is excessive."
16. Hence, the plaintiff - bank is entitled to the agreed rate of interest i.e., 20.25% p.a. The plaintiff - bank claims said rate of interest along with penal interest at 2% p.a. with weekly rests, which is exorbitant one. Besides, on perusal of Exs.P.1 to P.3 - Loan Application, Demand Promissory Note and Security Delivery Letter, in / 13 / O.S.No.674/2017 which there is no recital regarding the penal interest at the rate of 2% p.a. with weekly rests. Hence, plaintiff - bank is entitled interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. and not entitled for penal interest as claimed by the plaintiff - bank. On perusal Ex.P.14 - Loan Account Statement, pertains to the loan account of the defendant, it reveals that the defendant is in due of Rs.4,27,575/- as on 26.01.2017 to plaintiff - bank. Hence, plaintiff - bank is entitled to recover said amount along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. Accordingly, I answer point No.3 partly in the affirmative.
17. Point No.4:- In view of the above discussion and conclusion arrived at points No.1 to 3, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Suit of the plaintiff - bank is hereby partly decreed with costs.
/ 14 / O.S.No.674/2017 The plaintiff - bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.4,27,575/- (Four Lakh Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Seventy Five only) along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. from the date of suit till its complete realization.
The defendant is liable to pay the above said amount along with interest to the plaintiff - bank within 60 days from the date of this order.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, typed directly on computer, script corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court, this the 28th day of January, 2020.) (KHADARSAB), XXXIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City.
*** ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for plaintiff-bank:
P.W.1 : Suresh Prabhu A.
/ 15 / O.S.No.674/2017
2. List of documents exhibited for plaintiff :
Ex.P1 Loan application dated 8/4/2015 Ex.P2 D.P. note dated 8/4/2015 Ex.P3 Security delivery letter dated 8/4/2015 Ex.P4 Office copy of Advocate notice dt 9/8/2016 Ex.P5 to 9 5 postal receipts Ex.P10 to 13 4 postal covers Ex.P10(a) to Postal covers open in the open 13(a) Court and contents are marked Ex.P14 Loan account statement pertains to A/c No.14710200007597 Ex.P15 Acknowledgement issued by defendant dated 8/4/2015 (KHADARSAB), XXXIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City.
***
/ 16 / O.S.No.674/2017
Judgment pronounced in the open Court (Vide separate Judgment) ORDER Suit of the plaintiff - bank is hereby partly decreed with costs.
The plaintiff - bank is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.4,27,575/- (Four Lakh Twenty Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Seventy Five only) along with interest at the rate of 20.25% p.a. from the date of suit till its complete realization.
The defendant is liable to pay the above said amount along with interest to the plaintiff - bank within 60 days from the date of this order.
Draw decree accordingly.
XXXIX A.C.C & S. Judge, Bangalore City.
/ 17 / O.S.No.674/2017