Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10. The PW 1 has deposed that the Golden Curve, a partnership firm set up with primary objective of trading the C.C.No.17048/2024 agri related commodities including bananas. The accused is also one of the partner of the said firm Golden Curve. It is the case of the complainant that vide loan agreement dated 18.03.2023 a term loan of INR 2,00,00,000/- with interest @ 18% has been availed by Golden Curve. 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 Golden Curve, stood as Guarantor in his personal capacity, towards said credit facility and executed a Deed of Guarantee on 18-03-2023, 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 1 in the schedule 1 of Guarantee agreement and the accused has also affixed his digital signature to the Guarantee agreement. 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 7. As per the C.C.No.17048/2024 terms an agreement 4.6 the partners shall give personal guarantee to the loan of the firm. It is the case of the complainant that Golden Curve 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 with in 7 days of demand notice. It is stated that following default in loan repayments the complainant initiated guarantee invocation process by issuing the notice dated14.02.2024 to the accused through e mail on 14.02.2024. The complainant has produced the same as Ex.P

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.17048/2024

16. The defence of the accused is brought on record by way of cross examination of PW 1. In the cross examination of PW 1 the accused denied proper execution of loan documents and Guarantee agreement. 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. In the cross examination of PW 1 also at one stretch accused has admitted availement of the loan by Golden Curve and he stood as surety to the loan availed and he issued the cheques at the time of loan transactions for security and at another stretch has contended that he has not signed guarantee agreement. Thus he has admitted the loan transaction. The PW 1 has denied all such suggestions of accused. Nothing has been elicited from the mouth of PW 1 to to doubt the fact of availment of the loan by Golden Curve and the accused has stood as Guarantee to the loan by execution Guarantee agreement.