Bangalore District Court
Canara Bank vs Sri.Mahesh on 14 February, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY
(CCH-69)
Dated this the 14 th day of February 2020
PRESENT
Sri.Nanda Kumar.B, BAL., LL.B.,
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
ORIGINAL SUIT No.2110/2018
PLAINTIFF: Canara Bank
A body corporate constituted
under Banking Companies
(Acquisition and transfer of
undertakings) Act 1970, having
its Head Office at No.112,
J.C.Road, Bengaluru - 560 002
and having one of its Branch
offices at ISRO Layout,
Bengaluru - 560 078.
Represented by its
Agent and Manager,
Smt.S.A.Roopashree
W/o A.Anil
(By Sri.K.Shashidhar Parlathaya,
Advocate)
Versus
DEFENDANT: Sri.Mahesh
S/o Late.Muniyellappa,
No.7C, 1st Main, 5th Cross,
2 O.S.2110/2018
Vittal Nagar, ISRO Layout,
Bengaluru - 560 078.
And also at No.101, 1st Floor, 5th
Cross, Vasantha Vallabhanagar,
Doddakallasandra,
Bengaluru - 61.
(Exparte)
Date of Institution 17-03-2018
Nature of suit Money Suit
Date of commencement of 25-01-2019
evidence
Date on which judgment was
pronounced
Total Duration Years Months Days
JU DG M E NT
This suit is filed on behalf of the plaintiff-Bank
against the defendant for recovery of money.
2. Summarized facts of the plaint is as follows:
The defendant is having Saving Bank Account
No.2643101003511 with the plaintiff-Bank since 2005.
3 O.S.2110/2018
The defendant was operating his said Savings Bank
account satisfactorily till 2012 and he used to issue
cheques in favour of third parties and he was withdrawing
the amounts from his said Savings Bank account from time
to time. Earlier the plaintiff-Bank used to maintain
accounts of the customers in ledger extract and later the
Banks (including the plaintiff-Bank) changed to Core
Banking Solution (CBS) System from IBBS mode of
computing in the year 2006. During that, initial migration
process of Core Banking Solution (CBS) System from IBBS
mode of computing, the defendant had issued a cheque
bearing No.6888245 dated 14-04-2007 for Rs.1,50,000/-
favouring Priya G.N. During the said period, the plaintiff-
Bank was under the process of migration to core banking
solution system, the said cheque issued by the defendant
was not debited to the defendant's account. Subsequently,
during the Local Clearing and Cash Remittance (LCCR)
reconciliation process during 2012, it was found that, the
said cheque bearing No.688245 dated 14-04-2007 was not
4 O.S.2110/2018
debited to the account of the defendant and accordingly on
21-04-2012, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was debited to the
S.B. Account No.2643101003511 of the defendant
maintained in the plaintiff-Bank and since then the said
S.B. Account of the defendant has been overdrawn and the
same was intimated to the defendant by the Bank.
However, the defendant has paid only Rs.11,000/- by way
of cash deposit on 14-05-2012, but subsequently failed to
clear the overdrawings in his said S.B. Account and
therefore the said account of the defendant was classified
as NPA by the plaintiff. In spite of plaintiff-Bank's
continues follow up and personal requests the defendant
has not cleared the over drawings in his S.B. Account, but
has executed a letter of Revival dated 19-03-2015,
admitting his liability to the plaintiff-Bank. The plaintiff-
Bank has issued Notice dated 01-09-2017 to the defendant
notifying that the said S.B. Account has been overdrawn by
Rs.3,98,730/- in connection with passing of cheque bearing
No.688245 dated 14-04-2007 for Rs.1,50,000/-, but the
5 O.S.2110/2018
said notice was returned unserved. Hence, the plaintiff has
been constrained to file the present suit for recovery of the
above said amount from the defendant.
3. This suit was instituted before the Hon'ble
Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
Thereafter, the matter has been assigned to this Court. On
receipt of the case file, summons were issued to the
defendant by RPAD. Summons of defendant has been
returned with a shara as not claimed. In view of the said
shara, defendant has been placed exparte as he has
remained absent. Thereafter, the matter was posted for
evidence.
4. The plaintiff in order to prove its claim has got
examined one Smt.S.A.Roopashree, stated to be the
Manager of the plaintiff-Bank as PW.1 and got marked
Exs.P1 to 6 and closed its side.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff
perused the materials on record.
6 O.S.2110/2018
6. The points that arise for my consideration are
as under:
1. *******************Whether the plaintiff proves
that the defendant has borrowed a sum of
Rs.4,37,390-28 on 11-04-2008 agreeing to
repay the said loan in 60 monthly
installments with interest @ 11.25% per
annum with monthly rests?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that the
defendant Nos.1 to 3 are due in a sum of
Rs.5,76,572/- as on 21-03-2016 (date of
filing of the suit)?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief
as sought for?
4. What Order or Decree?
7. After hearing the arguments and perusal of
documents placed before me, my findings to the above
points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative;
Point No.2 : In the Affirmative;
Point No.3 : In the Affirmative;
Point No.4 : As per final order;
For the following;
7 O.S.2110/2018
R E A SON S
8. POINT Nos.1 AND 2: As these two points are
inter-linked, they are taken up together for common
discussion in order to avoid repetition of facts.
8(a) The plaintiff in support of its claim, has got
examined one Smt.Roopashree, as PW.1 and got marked
Exs.P1 to 5. PW.1 has filed her sworn affidavit in lieu of
her examination-in-chief. In her sworn affidavit, PW.1 has
reiterated the facts narrated in the plaint. Apart from the
oral evidence of PW.1, the plaintiff has produced and got
marked Exs.P1 to 6.
+++++++++++++++++++
8(b) From the perusal of Ex.P1, it is to be seen that
it is a loan application submitted by defendant Nos.1 to 3
seeking grant of loan for a sum of Rs.3,25,000/- towards
the education of the 1st defendant. Ex.P2 is the loan
sanction letter dated 11-04-2008, whereby the plaintiff has
sanctioned a loan of Rs.3,25,000/- to the defendants on
8 O.S.2110/2018
equated monthly repayment in 60 installments @ 11.25%
interest per annum which would commence after one year
from the course period or after six months after securing of
job by the 1st defendant, whichever is earlier. Ex.P3 is the
Affidavit of the defendant No.1, Ex.P4 is the Agreement of
Term Loan executed by defendant Nos.1 to 3, Ex.P5 is the
Common Agreement executed by defendant Nos.1 to 3,
Ex.P6 to 8 are the Balance and security confirmation
letters, Ex.P9 and 10 are two recall notices issued to
defendant Nos.1 to 3 dated 05-04-2013, Ex.P11 is the
Demand Notice issued to defendant Nos.1 to 3 dated 09-03-
2016 and Ex.P12 is the Statement of Account pertaining to
defendant Nos.1 to 3. These documents have not been
disputed by the defendants. Therefore, I do not find any
reasons to disbelieve the contents of the said documents.
8(c) The above said documents would certainly
indicate that the defendants have borrowed a sum of
Rs.3,25,000/- from the plaintiff agreeing to repay the said
amount with interest @ 11.25% per annum in 60 equated
9 O.S.2110/2018
monthly installments. The present suit is filed 21-03-2016.
Though the loan availed by the defendants is on 11-04-
2008, but the last balance confirmation letter has been
executed by the defendants on 09-04-2014. Therefore it is
to be seen that the present suit filed by the plaintiff is
within 3 years from the date of Ex.P8-Balance Confirmation
letter dated 09-04-2014. As such, this suit is in time.
Moreover, there is nothing on record to show that the
defendants have made any payment to the plaintiff towards
the said loan. As such, I hold point Nos.1 and 2 in the
AFFIRMATIVE.
9. POINT NO.3: As points No.1 and 2 have been
held in the affirmative, the plaintiff is naturally entitled for
a sum of Rs.5,76,572/- with future interest @ 10% per
annum from the date of suit till its realization. Hence, for
the above stated reasons and discussions, I hold point No.3
in the AFFIRMATIVE.
10 O.S.2110/2018
10. POINT NO.4: In view of my findings on point
Nos.1 to 3, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs.
The plaintiff is entitled for a sum of Rs.4,37,390/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety only), with future interest @ 10% per annum, from the date of suit till its realization from the defendant.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, typed by her directly on Computer, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 23 rd day of January 2020).
( Nanda Kumar B.) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF:
PW.1 S.A. Roopashree 25-01-2019 DOCUMENTS MARKED IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF:11 O.S.2110/2018
Ex.P1 S.B. Account opening form Ex.P2 Statement of account Ex.P3 Revival letter Ex.P4 Office copy of Bank Notice Ex.P5 Unserved postal cover Ex.P6 Letter WITNESSES EXAMINED AND THE DOCUMENTS MARKED IN FAVOUR OF THE DEFENDANT:
-- NIL --
( Nanda Kumar B.) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.