Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In brief, the case of the plaintiff as made out in the plaint is that the plaintiff is a Bank and a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies Act. Shri Munshi Lal, Senior Branch Manager is the authorized representative of the plaintiff and has been authorized to file the present suit on behalf of the plaintiff bank. The defendant No. 1 is a company which is maintaining a current account No. 603220110000858 with the plaintiff bank since 09.05.2016. The defendant No. 2 is one of the Director of the defendant No. 1. The defendant No. 1 through defendant No. 2 requested the plaintiff bank to grant Temporary Overdraft in the said current account to enable to meet their urgent business commitments. The said defendants assured the plaintiff bank to clear the dues on account of Temporary Overdraft within Twenty days. The plaintiff bank acceded to the request of the defendants and allowed Temporary Overdraft of Rs. 6,00,000/­ in the said current account for a period of Twenty days on 19.12.2017. The defendants executed the necessary documents with the plaintiff bank to avail the said Temporary Overdraft. On 19.12.2017, the amount of Rs. 6,00,000/­ was transferred from the debit of aforesaid account of defendant No. 1 to the account of M/s Arch Health Care Pvt. Ltd. vide cheque No. 26201. However, the defendants failed to honour their commitments to pay the overdraft amount along with interest. As per the guidelines of RBI, the account of defendants was classified as Non Performing Asset. The plaintiff bank issued a legal notice dt. 27.12.2018 by speed post and the same was served on the defendants. Despite the notice, the defendants failed to pay the outstanding amount in the aforesaid current account. The defendants are liable to pay Rs. 7,95,612/­ to the plaintiff as per the statement of account. The plaintiff has filed the suit for the recovery of amount of Rs. 7,95,612/­ along with interest @ 19.25% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the realization of the amount. Despite service of summons through publication, the defendants has not appeared and so the defendants have been proceeded ex­parte.