Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10. The PW 1 has deposed that a partnership firm by name White Globe, engaged in the business of purchasing the farm inputs and procuring agri related commodities, has availed credit facility by way of term loan of Rs.2,00,00,000/- by executing loan agreement dated 28.02.2023 with interest @ 18%. The complainant has produced the e-signed copy of the loan agreement as Ex.P 4. The complainant has also produced the Audit Trial substantiating the process of execution of loan agreement by affixing e-signatures by the parties with Hash value and it is marked as Ex.P 5. As per the terms of loan agreement, accused, who is also the partner of the White Globe, stood as Guarantor in his personal capacity, towards said credit facility and executed a Deed of Guarantee on 28.02.2023, in terms of which the accused agreed to repay the amount covered under the terms of loan agreement to the complainant. The complainant has produced the e-signed copy of the Guarantee agreement as Ex.P 6. In the schedule 1 of the Guarantee agreement the details of Guarantors is given and the name of accused found place in Guarantor 3 in the schedule 1 of Guarantee agreement and the accused has also affixed his digital signature to the Guarantee agreement. The complainant C.C.No.23005/2024 has also produced the Audit Trial substantiating the process of execution of loan agreement by affixing e-signatures by the parties with Hash value and it is marked as Ex.P 7. As per the terms of loan agreement the partners shall give personal guarantee to the loan of the firm. It is the case of the complainant that White Globe has failed to repay the loan in terms of the loan agreement and committed default. As per the Deed of Guarantee the the guarantors are jointly, severally liable to pay the due amount on demand by the complainant. As per the terms of Guarantee agreement 2.1 the Guarantors shall pay the due amount within 7 days of demand notice. It is stated that following default in loan repayments the complainant initiated guarantee invocation process by issuing the notice via email dated 14.02.2024 to the accused. The complainant has produced the same as Ex.P 8. The PW 1 has deposed that the accused agreed the repayment of said loan and issued a cheque bearing No.125610 dated 22.02.2024 drawn on ICICI Bank, Mumbai, Maharashtra for a sum of INR 1,60,00,000/- in favour of the complainant.

15. Therefore, in view of the principles laid down in the decision the onus is on the accused to rebut the presumption under 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused has not issued any reply at the initial stage after service of the legal notice and not utilized the earliest opportunity to put forward his defence.

C.C.No.23005/2024

16. The accused has cross examined PW 1 and he accused has taken his defence. In the cross examination of PW 1 the accused has denied availment of the loan by White Globe and he stood as guarantee to the said loan. He has taken the contention that without following provisions of section 35 of Information Technology Act the loan documents were executed. As discussed above the complainant has produced e-signed loan agreement and Guarantee agreement with Adit trial as per Ex.P 4 to 7. The complainant by producing Audit Trial providing details of process of execution of e-document with Hash value as per Ex.P 5 and P 7, has prima facie established due execution of the documents. The accused in the statement under Section 313 of CrPC has admitted availment of the loan by White Globe and he stood as Guarantee to the said loan. In the cross examination also he has also taken contradictory stand that he issued the cheques at the time of loan transactions for security. Thus he has indirectly admitted the loan transaction. Thus the accused at one stretch admitted the loan transaction and in another stretch denied execution of loan documents and avaliment of the loan and also existence of liability. But the PW 1 has denied all such suggestions of accused. Nothing has been elicited from the mouth of PW 1 to substantiate this contention of the accused.