12/25/2018 Idbi Bank Limited vs Sh.

Umesh Prakash on 3 August, 2018

Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer Mobile View

Get this document in PDF Print it on a file/printer View the actual judgment from court
Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience.
Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Delhi District Court

Idbi Bank Limited vs Sh. Umesh Prakash on 3 August, 2018

IN THE COURT OF JSCCASCJGJ, EAST DISTRICT,

KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI

Presided By : Sh. Jay Thareja, DJS

Civil Suit No: 883/2017

IDBI Bank Limited

Registered Office at:
IDBI Tower, WTC Complex,
Cuffe Parade, Mumbai400005.
Branch Office at:
C3536, Acharya Niketan,
Mayur Vihar1, New Delhi110091. ... Plaintiff
Versus
Sh. Umesh Prakash
3135/36, Roshanara Road,
Sabzi Mandi, Delhi110007.
Also at: 105, NDMC Flats, Balmiki Sadan,
Mandir Marg, New Delhi110001. ... Defendant

SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.17,900/ (RUPEES

SEVENTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED ONLY)
ALONGWITH COSTS, PENDENTE LITE AND
FUTURE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER
ANNUM, FILED UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF CODE
OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908.

DATE OF INSTITUTION : 03.11.2017

DATE OF FINAL ARGUMENTS : 16.07.2018
DATE OF DECISION : 03.08.2018

JUDGMENT

1. The plaintiff bank has filed this suit under the provisions of
Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") on the basis
of demand promissory note dated 19.09.2015 and loan acceptance letter Civil Suit No. 883/2017
IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash Page No. 1 of 6 dated 19.09.2015, executed between the
plaintiff bank and the defendant. It is prayed in plaint of this suit that a decree be passed in favour
of the plaintiff bank and against the defendant for a sum of Rs.17,900/-
along with costs, pendentelite interest and future interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

2. The case of the plaintiff bank as discernible from the plaint of

this suit and documents filed along with the plaint of this suit is that the plaintiff bank is a
company incorporated and registered under the

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/131128141/ 1/4
12/25/2018 Idbi Bank Limited vs Sh. Umesh Prakash on 3 August, 2018

Companies Act, 1956; that the plaintiff bank is a banking company within the meaning of Section
5(C) of the Banking Regulations Act, 1949
having its registered office at IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-
400005 and branch office at C3536, Acharya Niketan, Mayur Vihar1, New Delhi-
110091; that this suit has been filed by the plaintiff
bank through Sh. Sudhir Kumar, who is duly authorized to institute, sign and verify this suit on
behalf of the plaintiff bank as per the revised
Delegation of Powers, issued by the plaintiff bank w.e.f. March 2016; that
at the request of the defendant, the plaintiff bank had granted a Rupee
Term Loan/Financial Assistance of Rs.50,000/ to the defendant for the purpose of working capital
under Mudra Loan Scheme of the plaintiff
bank; that in consideration of sanctioning of the aforesaid loan/financial assistance, the defendant
had interalia executed demand promissory
note dated 19.09.2015 and loan acceptance letter dated 19.09.2015 in
favour of the plaintiff bank; that as per the terms of demand promissory
note and the loan acceptance letter dated 19.09.2015, it was interalia
agreed between the plaintiff bank and the defendant that the interest rate Civil Suit No. 883/2017
IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash Page No. 2 of 6
payable by the defendant on the loan/financial assistance amount would
be 11.75% per annum; that upon availing the loan/financial assistance amount of Rs.50,000/, the
defendant had defaulted in repaying the
loan/financial assistance amount, as per agreed terms and conditions; that as on 19.09.2017, a
sum of Rs.17,540/ was payable by the
defendant to the plaintiff bank; that the plaintiff bank had served legal notice dated 16.10.2017
upon the defendant, seeking payment of Rs.17,540/-
along with interest to the plaintiff bank; that despite service
of legal notice dated 16.10.2017, the defendant had not paid Rs.17,540/-
along with interest to the plaintiff bank and that as such, the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover
from the defendant, the principal amount of Rs.17,540/, pre-
litigation interest of Rs.360/, calculated at the rate of
18% per annum, on the principal amount of Rs.17,540/, for the period,
20.09.2017 to 31.10.2017 as well as pendentelite and future interest.

3. A perusal of the ordersheets reveals that upon filing of this

suit, the summons as prescribed under Form IV, Appendix B, Schedule
1 of CPC were ordered to be issued qua the defendant, on 20.11.2017.
The said summons were served upon the defendant through his sister,
on 19.12.2017. In view of Order V Rule 15 of CPC, the said service was
accepted to be valid service of the defendant. Thereafter, the Ahlmad
was directed to report whether any appearance has been filed by the
defendant. The Ahlmad has reported that till date, no appearance has been filed by the defendant.

4. I had heard Sh. Parthiv J. Mehta, Ld. Advocate for the Civil Suit No. 883/2017
IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash Page No. 3 of 6 plaintiff bank, on 20.02.2018 and 16.07.2018.
During the hearing on 20.02.2018, the Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff bank had submitted that in
terms of provisions of Order XXXVII, Rule 2(3) of CPC, since no
appearance has been filed by the defendant, the allegations made in the plaint should be deemed
to be admitted by the defendant and the
plaintiff bank should be granted a favourable judgment, forthwith. During
the hearing on 16.07.2018, the Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff bank had abandoned the claim of pre-
litigation interest of Rs.360/.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/131128141/ 2/4
12/25/2018 Idbi Bank Limited vs Sh. Umesh Prakash on 3 August, 2018

5. After considering the submissions made by the Ld. Advocate for the
plaintiff bank on 20.02.2018 and 16.07.2018 and perusing the
record of the Court file, I find that this suit has been filed within the period
of limitation against the defendant as the demand promissory note and
loan acceptance letter were executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff bank, on 19.09.2015
and this suit has been filed within three
years from 19.09.2015 i.e. on 03.11.2017. Further, I find that this Court has territorial jurisdiction
to entertain this suit because the demand promissory note dated 19.09.2015 and loan
acceptance letter dated 19.09.2015 were executed by the defendant in favour of the
plaintiff bank, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Lastly, I find that the submission made
by the Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff bank on
20.02.2018 is in conformity with the provisions of Order XXXVII, Rule
2(3) of CPC. Order XXXVII, Rule 2(3) of CPC reads as under:

"(3) The defendant shall not defend the suit referred to in subrule (1) unless
he enters an appearance and in default of his entering an
Civil Suit No. 883/2017 IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash Page No. 4 of 6
appearance the allegations in the plaint shall be
deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be
entitled to a decree for any sum, not exceeding the sum mentioned in the summons,
together with interest at the rate specified, if any, up to the date
of the decree and such sum for costs as may be
determined by the High Court from time to time by
rules made in that behalf and such decree may be executed forthwith."

6. Thus, in light of failure of the defendant to file appearance

within the statutory period prescribed under Order XXXVII of CPC, 1908
this suit is hereby decreed for a sum of Rs.17,540/ (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred
forty Only) along with costs and interest, in
favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendant.

7. In the prayer clause of the plaint of this suit, the plaintiff bank has claimed pendentelite and
future interest at the rate of 18% per annum. In view of the loan acceptance letter
dated 19.09.2015, the plaintiff bank is granted pendentelite interest at the rate of 11.75% per
annum. Further, in view of Order XXXVII Rule 2(3) of CPC, 1908, the
prayer for grant of future interest is declined. Thus, it is ordered that the
plaintiff bank shall only be entitled to pendentelite interest at the rate of 11.75% per annum on the
sum of Rs.17,540/ (Rupees Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred forty Only), from the defendant.

Civil Suit No. 883/2017 IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash Page No. 5 of 6

8. After preparation of decree sheet by the Reader, file shall be consigned to the record room.

Announced in open Court (Jay Thareja)

today on 03.08.2018 JSCC/ASCJ/GJ/EAST DISTRICT
Karkardooma Courts/Delhi

JAY
THAREJA
Digitally signed by JAY
THAREJA
Location: East District

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/131128141/ 3/4
12/25/2018 Idbi Bank Limited vs Sh. Umesh Prakash on 3 August, 2018
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
Date: 2018.08.03 16:35:44
+0530

Civil Suit No. 883/2017

IDBI Bank Ltd. v Umesh Prakash
Page No. 6 of 6

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/131128141/ 4/4