Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: temporary overdraft in Unknown vs Sh. Parveen Kumar on 4 May, 2012Matching Fragments
The plaintiff bank has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.90,000/ against the defendant along with interest & costs.
Suit No.325/10 Page : 1/5
2. The facts of the case, in nutshell, are that plaintiff bank is a body corporate engaged in the business of banking. The defendant was maintaining a saving bank account no. SB 1795.101.42400 with the plaintiff bank since 23.01.2009. The defendant was availing various customer services and facilities such as cheque book, temporary overdraft against the cheque etc. In January 2009, the defendant had deposited a cheque bearing no. 608843 dated 21.01.2009 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/ in his favour with the plaintiff bank and had requested for temporary overdraft against the said cheque. The said cheque was sent for clearance by the plaintiff bank on 24.01.2009. The credit of said cheque was entered in his saving account by the plaintiff bank on 24.01.2009 and the same was duly shown in his Statement of Account since the next date i.e. 25.01.2009. The defendant withdrew the aforesaid amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs from his saving bank account on 29.01.2009 and 30.01.2009 vide two cheques amounting to Rs.3.90 Lacs and Rs.10,000/. The cheque deposited by the defendant was returned dishonoured by Indian Overseas Bank on account of insufficient funds in the second week of February 2009 and accordingly, the amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs had become overdue and outstanding against the defendant. The plaintiff bank Suit No.325/10 Page : 2/5 requested the defendant to clear the outstanding dues. The defendant had deposited Rs.3.40 Lacs with the plaintiff bank from February 2009 till July 2009 and failed to deposit the balance amount of Rs.60,000/ despite repeated demands by the plaintiff bank. Thereafter, the plaintiff bank issued a legal notice dated 20.10.2010 but the same was not complied by the defendant. The defendant is thus liable to pay the amount of Rs.60,000/ alongwith interest @ 16.5% p.a. Compounded monthly. Finding no other alternative, the present suit was filed by the plaintiff.
5. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff and have perused the record carefully.
6. The testimony of PW1 has remained unrebutted and unchallenged and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. The plaintiff bank has proved that the defendants had availed the temporary overdraft facility against cheque Ex.PW1/3 which was dishonoured on its presentation. The plaintiff has also proved that the defendant withdrew the amount of Rs.4.00 Lacs vide cheques Ex.PW1/4 and PW1/5 respectively. The plaintiff has also proved the statement of account Ex.PW1/11 which shows that a sum of Rs.90,000/ was due and outstanding against the defendant as on 31.7.2010 which the defendant has failed to pay. The plaintiff has Suit No.325/10 Page : 4/5 proved the legal demand notice to the defendant as Ex.PW1/9 and postal receipt as Ex.PW1/10. In view of the testimony of PW1 as well as the documents proved by the plaintiff the plaintiff has established its case against the defendant.