Bangalore District Court
Indian Overseas Bank vs Sri. Jagadisha C.R on 8 June, 2016
BEFORE Ist ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE.
(SCCH-11)
DATED THIS 8th DAY OF JUNE, 2016
PRESENT: SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA. P.S., B.Com., L.L.B.
I ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVII ACMM
SC.482/2016
PLAINTIFF: Indian Overseas Bank,
Rajarajeshwari Nagar Branch,
No.1143, 60 feet road,
BEML 3rd stage,
Bangalore-98
Reptd. by its Chief Manager.
(By pleader - Sri. M.S.V )
- V/S -
DEFENDANTS: Sri. Jagadisha C.R,
S/o Ramachandraiah C.B.
Major,
Resident of No.501A, 2nd Cross,
BMK Layout,
Bangalore-26.
(Exparte)
JUDGMENT
This is the suit filed by the plaintiff Bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.72,401/- with interest at the rate of 12.47% per annum from the 2 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) date of suit till the date of realization and court costs and such other reliefs as this Court deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case.
2) The brief facts of the plaintiff Bank case are as follows:
The defendant has approached the plaintiff bank for financial assistance for purchasing Bajaj Auto worth Rs.1,40,000/- under the small loan scheme. The plaintiff Banks has sanctioned a loan of Rs.1,15,000/- on 12.12.2011, with a condition that, it shall repayable in 60 installments at the rate of Rs.2,550/- per month from 1st April of 2012. The rate of interest is 11.75% per annum with half yearly rest and in case of default in payment of installments, a penal interest of Rs.2% is chargeable. The defendant, agreeing for the same, has availed the benefit of the said loan by executing deed of hypothecation agreement, on demand promissory note and a letter authorizing the bank to recover the dues from the savings account of the defendant.
The defendant has hypothecated the Auto, which was purchased by him, in favour of bank by executing deed of hypothecation. The defendant is irregular in payment of installments and never adhered to payment 3 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) schedules. He did not pay the loan amount as per the terms of the loan and regularize the account. He has executed a revival letter acknowledging the liability under loan account on 04.01.2014. On account of non-payment of the amounts dues, the account has been classified as NPA as per RBI norms.
3) The defendant is dues to pay a sum of Rs.67,437/-. The defendant has agreed to pay penal interest at the rate of 2% per annum compounded monthly in case of default. He has having defaulted the payment, he is liable to pay interest at the rate of 12.47%. The undebited interest on the loan amount due is in a sum of Rs.4,964/-. The defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.67,437/- with interest of Rs.4,964/- totally Rs.72,401/- as on the date of suit. Hence this suit.
4) After service of summons, the defendant remained absent, hence placed exparte. Since he placed exparte, the plaintiff was called upon to prove its case. Accordingly, in order to prove the case of the plaintiff Bank, its Senior Manager namely K.V. Ramkumar has filed affidavit in lieu of examination in chief and examined as PW.1. Besides 4 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) his evidence, he has produced 7 documents and got them marked as Ex.P.1 to 7 and closed his side evidence.
5) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff.
6) Having heard and perused the records. The following points that would arise for my consideration:
1) Whether plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit claim with interest as prayed for?
2) What order or decree?
R E A S O N S
7) POINTS NO.1: It is the specific case of the plaintiff Bank that, the defendant has availed a loan of Rs.1,15,000/- for purchasing the Auto on 12.12.2011, agreeing to repay the said loan amount in 60 monthly installments at the rate of Rs.2,550/- per month commencing from 1st April 2012. It is further case of the plaintiff that, the defendant has agreed to pay the interest at the rate of 11.75% per annum and also agreed to pay penal interest of 2% in case of default in 5 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) payment of installment. It is further case of the plaintiff that, the defendant has executed deed of hypothecation agreement, on demand promissory note in favour of plaintiff bank. After availing the loan, the defendant has not paid the loan amount and its interest regularly. He is still due in a sum of Rs.72,401/- to the plaintiff Bank as on the date of suit. It is further case of the plaintiff that, the defendant has executed a revival letter on 04.01.2014 acknowledging the liability under the loan account. Inspite of repeated demands and request, the defendant has not paid the loan amount due to the plaintiff.
8) In order to prove the case of the plaintiff, its Senior Manager has reiterated the plaint averments in his examination in chief, which was accepted in the form of affidavit. In support of his oral evidence, he has produced 7 documents as per Ex.P.1 to 7. Ex.P.1 is the loan application filed by the defendant. Ex.P.2 is the loan sanction letter, Ex.P.3 is the deed of hypothecation, Ex.P.4 is the on demand promissory note, Ex.P.6 is the revival letter and Ex.P.7 is the account extract. On perusal of these documents, it is crystal clear that, the defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- for purchasing the Auto, agreeing to 6 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) pay the said amount in 60 monthly installments. It further indicates that, the defendant has agreed to pay interest at the rate of 11.75% per annum. It further indicates that, the defendant has executed revival letter acknowledging his debt on 07.01.2014. When he has executed a revival letter acknowledging his liability on 07.01.2014, the limitation is save to file suit for recovery of loan amount. Ex.P.7 indicates that, the defendant is due in a sum of Rs.67,437/- as on the date of suit. The oral testimony of PW.1 is coupled with the documentary evidence at Ex.P.1 to
7. Admittedly, in the instant case, defendant was placed exparte, when he placed exparte, it can be said that, there is no contest with regard to the plaintiff claim. When there is no contest by the defendant, the oral evidence as well as documentary evidence at Ex.P.1 to 7 put forth by the plaintiff stood as unchallenged and un-rebutted. As such, there are no reasons to disbelieve the case of the plaintiff that, the defendant has availed a loan of Rs.1,15,000/- agreeing to repay the said loan amount with interest at the rate of 11.75% per annum. Further, he is still due to pay a sum of Rs.72,401/- as on the date of suit. When defendant has not contested the plaintiff case, I have no option except to accept the plaintiff case to the effect that, the defendant has borrowed a sum of 7 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) Rs.1,15,000/- for purchasing the Auto and he is still due to pay a sum of Rs.72,401/- as on the date of suit. In view of this, I am of the opinion that, plaintiff bank is entitled to recover a suit amount with interest as prayed for. Hence, I answered this point is in the Affirmative.
9) POINT NO.2 : In view of the findings given on the above said point and reasons thereon, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Suit of the plaintiff is decreed with cost. Further, the plaintiff Bank is entitled to recover the suit claim of Rs.71,401/- with interest at the rate of 12.47% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization from the defendant.
Office to draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her and corrected by me, then pronounced in Open court on this the 08th day of June, 2016.) (CHANDRASHEKARA P.S.) I ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVII ACMM 8 SC 482/2016 (SCCH-11) A N N E X U R E LIST OF WITNESS EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:
PW.1 - K.V. Ram Kumar LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT:
- NIL -
LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF:
Ex.P.1 - Loan application Ex.P.2 - Loan sanction letter Ex.P.3 - Deed of hypothecation Ex.P.4 - On demand promissory note Ex.P.5 - Letter written by defendant Ex.P.6 - Revival letter Ex.P.7 - Account extract
LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT:
- NIL -
I ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVII ACMM