Bangalore District CourtIcici Bank Limited vs Mohammed Hyder on 19 August, 2020IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND\n               SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU\n\n              Dated this the 19 th day of August, 2020\n                            Present :-\n      Sri. Hosamani Siddappa .H. B.A. LL.B., (Spl.)\n          XXXIV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,\n                        Bengaluru.\n                        O.S. No.3620/2018\n\nPlaintiff:-             ICICI Bank Limited\n                        Mittal Towers, M.G. Road\n                        Bengaluru\n                        Represented by its Debt Manager\n                        Sri. Sandeep, S/o Divakaran K\n\n                        (M/s M.V.Kini & Co., Advocates)\n                                V/s\nDefendant          :-   Mohammed Hyder\n                        No.367, 7th Cross\n                        M.S. Ramaiah North City\n                        Thanisandra Main Road\n                        Dr. Shivarama Karanth Nagar\n                        Behind Eliments Mall\n                        Bengaluru - 560 077.\n\n                        (Sri.Mohankumar .H, Advocate)\n\n    Date of Institution of the :           24/04/2018\n    suit\n    Nature of the suit         :           Money Suit\n\n    Date of commencement of :              13/08/2019\n    recording of evidence\n    Date on which the judgment :           19/08/2020\n    was pronounced\n    Total duration             :         2 years 3 months\n                                              25 days\n                                                  O.S.No.3620/2018\n                              2\n\n                       JUDGMENT1. This is the suit filed by the Plaintiff Bank against the\n   defendant for recovery of Rs.4,64,033.33 Ps. with future\n   interest from the date of suit till the date of realization.2. The brief facts set out by the Plaintiff Bank are that, t he\n   defendant has approached the Plaintiff Bank for availing\n   a personal loan of Rs.10,00,000/- and the Plaintiff Bank\n   has approved the loan application, pursuant to that the\n   defendant submitted his Preliminary Credit Facility\n   Application bearing No.1864912 on 10.12.2014.           It is\n   further urged that pursuant to the said sanction of the\n   loan, the defendant had fulfilled all the requirements\n   and agreed to repay the said personal loan amount vide\n   60 equated monthly installments (EMI) of Rs.27,321/-\n   p.m. The defendant had also agreed to pay fixed rate of\n   interest at 13.99% and also agreed to pay penalty in\n   case of delayed repayment at 24% p.a. by accepting the\n   terms of sanction and acknowledging the Key Fact\n   Statement and most important information. It is further\n   urged that after completion of all necessary procedures\n   and execution of the respective loan documents, the\n   Plaintiff Bank had disbursed the sanctioned loan amount\n   i.e., a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- after deduction of service\n   tax and other charges on 10.12.2014 vide Personal Loan\n   Account N0.LPBNG00030973810.            It is further urged\n   that defendant is very irregular in payment of the EMIs\n   towards the repayment of the personal loan and thereby,\n                                                    O.S.No.3620/20183has violated the terms and conditions of the agreement.\n   Despite of repeated reminders and demands, the\n   defendant has not regularized the repayment of the loan\n   amount, as such the Plaintiff Bank was constrained to\n   issue a loan recall notice to defendant for payment of\n   the outstanding amount, in spite of it defendant has not\n   regularized the said loan account. Lastly, he has made a\n   last   payment     of   Rs.27,500/-   on    14.12.2017     and\n   thereafter he is in default. Hence this suit.3. After service of summons / notice to the defendant, he\n   appeared through his counsel.              Though sufficient\n   chances were given to file the W.S., the defendant did\n   not choose to file the written statement and hence the\n   same was taken as nil.4. To prove the case of the plaintiff bank, authorized\n   officers have been examined as PWs.1 and 2 and got\n   marked in all seven documents at Ex.P1 to P7.5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the\n   plaintiff bank.6. The following points would arise for my consideration :-1. Whether the plaintiff bank proves that\n          defendant is due of suit claim as alleged?2. Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for\n          future interest as sought?O.S.No.3620/201843. Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled for\n        the relief as sought?4. What order or decree?7. My finding on the above points are as follows :-Point No.1: In the Affirmative.Point No.2: In the Partly Affirmative.Point No.3: In the Partly Affirmative.Point No.4: As per the final order for the following:R E A S ON S8. Point Nos.1 to 3:      I     wish        to     take   these   points\n   together for discussion to avoid repetition of facts and\n   circumstances of the case. To prove the case of the\n   plaintiff bank, the Managers of the plaintiff bank are\n   examined as PW.1 and 2 and got marked seven\n   documents as per Ex.P1 to P7.                 Before discussing the\n   oral evidence of PW.1 and 2, I would like to discuss the\n   documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff bank.\n   Ex.P1 is the certified copy of Power of Attorney, Ex.P2 is\n   the original loan application, Ex.P3 is the Credit facility\n   application   form,    Ex.P4        is        the   Most   important\n   information, Ex.P5 is the copy of legal notice dated\n   14.12.2017, Ex.P5(a) is the postal receipt, Ex.P6 is the\n                                                    O.S.No.3620/20185statement of account of the defendant, Ex.P7 is the\n      notarized copy of Power of Attorney.9. To substantiate the documentary evidence, it is just and\n      necessary to see the oral evidence of PWs.1 and 2, who\n      have deposed before the court by way of affidavit, which\n      is nothing but replica of contents of the plaint. Further,\n      PW.1 deposed regarding outstanding principal amount\n      of the defendant as on date of suit. On perusal of the\n      oral and documentary evidence of PWs 1 and 2, it\n      remained unchallenged, since the defendant has not\n      resisted the case of plaintiff bank by filing written\n      statement or by adducing oral or documentary evidence.\n      Further, it is made clear that defendant is due of suit\n      claim, which is in time.      Though the plaintiff bank\n      requested the defendant to repay the same, but it went\n      in vain.10.        With regard to future interest is concerned, though\n      the loan was availed by the defendant as personal loan,\n      but the circumstances of the case as the defendant has\n      not filed any written statement nor adduced any oral or\n      documentary evidence.     Under these circumstances by\n      invokingSection 34of C.P.C. if future interest at the rate\n      of 8% per annum is granted it would meet the ends of\n      justice. Accordingly, I have no hesitation to answer Point\n      No.1 in the affirmative and Point No.2 and 3 in the partly\n      affirmative.O.S.No.3620/2018611.        Point No.4 :- For the reasons stated above, I proceed\n         to pass the following :-ORDER\n\n                    The suit of the plaintiff bank is\n              hereby decreed with cost as under.Plaintiff bank is entitled for recovery\n              of suit claim of Rs. 4,64,033.33 (Rupees\n              four lakhs sixty four thousand thirty\n              three and paise thirty three only) with\n              future interest at 8% per annum from the\n              date of suit till realization.It is further ordered that defendant\n              is liable to pay the decretal amount within\n              a period of sixty days from the date of this\n              order, failing which plaintiff bank is at\n              liberty to take steps as per law.Draw decree accordingly.(Dictated to the Judgment Writer directly on computer, typed by him, revised\nby me and after corrections pronounced in the open court on this the 19 th\nday of August, 2020.)\n\n\n\n\n                             (HOSAMANI SIDDAPPA.H.)\n                        XXXIV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge\n                                     Bengaluru.O.S.No.3620/20187ANNEXURE1. LIST OF       WITNESSES       EXAMINED     ON    BEHALF      OF\nPLAINTIFF :-P.W.1:-     Mr. Chethan Kumar, Manager\nP.W.2:      Mr. Pramodh, Debt Manager2. LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF :-Ex.P.1:     C.C. of Power of Attorney.\nEx.P.2:     Loan application\nEx.P.3:     Credit Facility Application\nEx.P.4:     Most Important Information\nEx.P.5:     Loan Recall Notice\nEx.P.5(a): Postal Receipt\nEx.P.6:     Statement of Account of the Defendant\nEx.P7:      Notarized copy of Power of Attorney.\n\n\n3.   LIST   OF    WITNESS        EXAMINED    ON     BEHALF      OF\nDEFENDANT :-\n     NIL4. LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT :-NIL\n\n\n\n                     XXXIV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge\n                                  Bengaluru.