Sri N. Keerthi Simha

IN THE COURT OF THE VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT; HYDERABAD

Present: SRI N.Keerthi Simha, VII Junior Civil Judge.

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

Tuesday, this the 21st day of March, 2023.

O.S.No. 3370 of 2021

Between:

CANARA BANK,

A Nationalized Bank Constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, having its Regd. office at 112, Jayachamarajendra Road, Bangalore - 560 002, and having various branches all over India and a Branch situated at Ameerpet Branch, D.No.6-3-688/32-35, 1st floor, Vamsee Estate, Ameerpet, Hyderabad - 500 016, by its Manager and G.P.A. holder Sri N. Raju S/o. Sri N. Ramulu,

aged 32 years, R/o. Hyderabad. ...Plaintiff

And

1. M/s. Velpuree Narasimham, Rep. by its proprietor Sri Velpuree Narasimham, S/o. Sri Srimannarayana, a/a 58 years, R/o. D.No.2-1-15/A, Dr. Chary Lane, St.No.20, New Nallakunta, Hyd. - 500 044

2. Sri Velpuree Narasimham, S/o. Sri Srimannarayana, aged 58 years, Occ: Business, R/o. D.No.2-1-15/A, Dr. Chary Lane, St.No.20, New Nallakunta,

Hyderabad. - 500 044. ...Defendants

This suit coming on 13.03.2023 final hearing before me in the presence of Sri A.V.V.S.Prasad, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained exparte, and the matter having been stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

: J U D G M E N T :

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.9,77,214.99ps/- (Rupees nine lakhs seventy seven thousand two hundred and fourteen and ninety nine paise only) together with interest thereon @ 11.95% per annum compounded monthly from the date of suit till the date of realization.

2.The averments of the plaint would demonstrate that the Defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility and the defendant No.1, is a sole proprietary firm, of which defendant No.2, is the sole proprietor, as per law Sole proprietary firm and Individual are one and the same, as such, documents executed as sole proprietor by defendant No.1, are binding on defendant No.2, in his individual capacity also, however, in both the capacities, the suit is filed for recovery, for effectively recovering the loan amount sanctioned, against the Hypothecation of Assets Financed i.e. Centering

Plates, Jack Pipes and Acrow Spans, in the name of the firm and also against personal obligations of the defendant No.2, in his individual capacity. The

Defendant No.2, who is an individual approached the plaintiff bank, as sole proprietor of M/s. Velpuree Narasimham i.e. defendant No.1, for sanction of

Loan i.e. for carrying on business of Centering Unit, as an MSME Unit, with

Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises, for his requirements, vide his loan application dated.17.9.2018 and the loan application is filed along with the plaint numbered 1, in the list. On request of the defendants, the plaintiff bank sanctioned Term loan limit to defendant/s, for a limit of Rs.9,03,000/- (Rupees

Nine Lakhs Three Thousand only) on 17.9.2018, against Hypothecation of Assets

Financed i.e. Centering Plates, Jack Pipes and Acrow Spans, and personal obligation of the defendant No.2, to repay the loan being borrower, the loan account number is No.0648768000105, maintained by defendants with plaintiff

Bank and the loan is to be repaid with 60 (Sixty) months equated monthly installments of Rs.19,724/- p.m. (Rupees Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred and

Twenty Four only), and the sanction letter dt.17.9.2018, duly acknowledged by the defendant/s is filed along with the plaint numbered 2, in the list. In terms of sanction of DPN Term loan facility, the defendants have executed following documents in favour of the Plaintiff Bank. The defendant/s have executed

Agreement cum Deed of Hypothecation 17.9.2018 , in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 3 in the list. IL The defendant/s have executed Pronote, dt.17.9.2018, in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 4 in the list. The defendant/s have executed Particulars of Hypothecated goods, dated.4.10.2018, the defendants acknowledged the receipt of assets in good condition as hypothecated for centering unit for which loan is availed, acquired through bank finance, in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 5 in the list. The defendant has fully availed the loan sanctioned by the Plaintiff

Bank, by operating the loan account maintained with the Plaintiff Bank and has received the consideration. The defendant/s have failed to keep up with the terms of loan, as agreed upon, and despite the plaintiff made several demands and deposit the amount into the loan account maintained by defendants with the plaintiff bank, as per terms of sanction letter and also shifted the hypothecated machinery and goods to unknown places without the consent and concurrence of the plaintiff and the plaintiff reserves its rights to proceed against hypothecated machinery and goods, if they are traced during the pendency of the suit or thereafter, as per agreements and also reserves its rights to produce any documents if contingency arises after filing of the suit, with the leave of the

Hon'ble Court. The defendant/s however, paid loan amounts irregularly and three

such last payments are on 14.1.2021, apart from paying amounts on 12.01.2021 and 1.1.2021. However, the loan account became irregular due to non-payment of loan installments, as per sanction norms and the account has become Non-

Performing Assets, and the suit is within three years from date of execution of loan documents and several part payments made including on 14.1.2021 , apart from paying amounts on 12.01.2021 and 1.1.2021, as evidenced in the

Statement of Account. The defendant/s defaulted in payment of installments as agreed upon, despite issuance of several Notices and demands made by the plaintiff. The Plaintiff Bank also issued the notices on 20.2.2019, and on 23.3.2021, for payment of entire loan outstanding, despite the notice, the defendant/s failed to pay the loan amount and the notices on 20.2.2019 , and on 23.3.2021 , is filed along with the notice is filed along with the plaint numbered 5, in the list. As the defendant/s despite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff Bank, failed to pay the loan amount as agreed upon, the plaintiff Bank has no other go than to file the suit for recovery of sum due and payable by the defendant/s to the plaintiff Bank, A sum of Rs.9,77,214.99 ps. (Rupees Nine

Lakhs Seventy Seven thousand Two hundred and Fourteen and Ninety Nine paise only) remained due and payable by the defendants as on the date of plaint as per certified extract of statement, is filed along with the plaint numbered 6, in the list. The particulars of the accounts maintained by the Plaintiff bank in regular course of business submitted as per the provisions of the Bankers Books

Evidence Act, 1891. The Interest charged and penal interest charged, by the

Plaintiff Bank in this account is reasonable as may be fixed by the Bank and/or as per the guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India, from time to time. Hence the Plaintiff Bank is entitled to claim the amount on contractual rate of interest during the pendent elite also. The plaintiff reserves their right to file any document with the leave of this Hon'ble Court, in the event of any contingencies that may arise after filing the suit. Hence, this suit.

3.Heard the counsel for plaintiff and defendant is set exparte on 08.02.2023 and remained ex parte.

4.To substantiate the case of the plaintiff bank, its Manager is examined

Pw1, and got marked i.e., marked as Ex. A1 Original application dated 17.09.2018, Ex.A2 Original sanction order dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A3 Original agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A4 Original pronote dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A5 Particulars of hypothecated goods dated 04.10.2018, Ex. A6 Notice dated 20.02.2019, Ex. A7 Notice dated 23.03.2021,Ex. A8 Certified extract of Statement of account along with certificate under Sec.2A (A), 2A(B) & 2A (C),Ex.A9 Authorization letter to represent plaintiff.

5.In the light of the submissions, the following points would emerge for consideration namely:

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant as prayed for?

2.To what relief?

6.Point No.1:- The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the averments of the plaint along with material placed on record demonstrate that the defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility and the defendant No.1, is a sole proprietary firm, of which defendant No.2, is the sole proprietor, as per law Sole proprietary firm and Individual are one and the same, as such, documents executed as sole proprietor by defendant No.1, are binding on defendant No.2, in his individual capacity also, however, in both the capacities, the suit is filed for recovery, for effectively recovering the loan amount sanctioned, against the Hypothecation of Assets Financed i.e. Centering

Plates, Jack Pipes and Acrow Spans, in the name of the firm and also against personal obligations of the defendant No.2, in his individual capacity. The

Defendant No.2, who is an individual approached the plaintiff bank, as sole proprietor of M/s. Velpuree Narasimham i.e. defendant No.1, for sanction of

Loan i.e. for carrying on business of Centering Unit, as an MSME Unit, with

Ministry of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises, for his requirements, vide his loan application dated.17.9.2018 and the same is substantiated by Ex. A1

Original application dated 17.09.2018, Ex.A2 Original sanction order dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A3 Original agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A4 Original pronote dated 17.09.2018, Ex. A5 Particulars of hypothecated goods dated 04.10.2018, Ex. A6 Notice dated 20.02.2019, Ex. A7

Notice dated 23.03.2021,Ex. A8 Certified extract of Statement of account along with certificate under Sec.2A (A), 2A(B) & 2A (C),Ex.A9 Authorization letter to represent plaintiff. and the loan application is filed along with the plaint numbered 1, in the list. On request of the defendants, the plaintiff bank sanctioned Term loan limit to defendant/s, for a limit of Rs.9,03,000/- (Rupees

Nine Lakhs Three Thousand only) on 17.9.2018, against Hypothecation of Assets

Financed i.e. Centering Plates, Jack Pipes and Acrow Spans, and personal obligation of the defendant No.2, to repay the loan being borrower, the loan account number is No.0648768000105, maintained by defendants with plaintiff

Bank and the loan is to be repaid with 60 (Sixty) months equated monthly installments of Rs.19,724/- p.m. (Rupees Nineteen Thousand Seven Hundred and

Twenty Four only), and the sanction letter dt.17.9.2018, duly acknowledged by the defendant/s is filed along with the plaint numbered 2, in the list. In terms of sanction of DPN Term loan facility, the defendants have executed following documents in favour of the Plaintiff Bank. The defendant/s have executed

Agreement cum Deed of Hypothecation 17.9.2018 , in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 3 in the list. IL The defendant/s have executed Pronote, dt.17.9.2018, in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 4 in the list. The defendant/s have executed Particulars of Hypothecated goods, dated.4.10.2018, the defendants acknowledged the receipt of assets in good condition as hypothecated for centering unit for which loan is availed, acquired through bank finance, in favour of the plaintiff bank, and the same is filed along with plaint numbered 5 in the list. The defendant has fully availed the loan sanctioned by the Plaintiff

Bank, by operating the loan account maintained with the Plaintiff Bank and has received the consideration. The defendant/s have failed to keep up with the terms of loan, as agreed upon, and despite the plaintiff made several demands and deposit the amount into the loan account maintained by defendants with the plaintiff bank, as per terms of sanction letter and also shifted the hypothecated machinery and goods to unknown places without the consent and concurrence of the plaintiff and the plaintiff reserves its rights to proceed against hypothecated machinery and goods, if they are traced during the pendency of the suit or thereafter, as per agreements and also reserves its rights to produce any documents if contingency arises after filing of the suit, with the leave of the

Hon'ble Court. The defendant/s however, paid loan amounts irregularly and three

such last payments are on 14.1.2021, apart from paying amounts on 12.01.2021 and 1.1.2021. However, the loan account became irregular due to non-payment of loan installments, as per sanction norms and the account has become Non-

Performing Assets, and the suit is within three years from date of execution of loan documents and several part payments made including on 14.1.2021 , apart from paying amounts on 12.01.2021 and 1.1.2021, as evidenced in the

Statement of Account. The defendant/s defaulted in payment of installments as agreed upon, despite issuance of several Notices and demands made by the plaintiff. The Plaintiff Bank also issued the notices on 20.2.2019, and on 23.3.2021, for payment of entire loan outstanding, despite the notice, the defendant/s failed to pay the loan amount and the notices on 20.2.2019 , and on 23.3.2021 , is filed along with the notice is filed along with the plaint numbered 5, in the list. As the defendant/s despite of repeated demands made by the plaintiff Bank, failed to pay the loan amount as agreed upon, the plaintiff Bank has no other go than to file the suit for recovery of sum due and payable by the defendant/s to the plaintiff Bank, A sum of Rs.9,77,214.99 ps. (Rupees Nine

Lakhs Seventy Seven thousand Two hundred and Fourteen and Ninety Nine paise only) remained due and payable by the defendants as on the date of plaint as per certified extract of statement, is filed along with the plaint numbered 6, in the list. The particulars of the accounts maintained by the Plaintiff bank in regular course of business submitted as per the provisions of the Bankers Books

Evidence Act, 1891. The Interest charged and penal interest charged, by the

Plaintiff Bank in this account is reasonable as may be fixed by the Bank and/or as per the guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India, from time to time. Hence the Plaintiff Bank is entitled to claim the amount on contractual rate of interest during the pendent elite also. The plaintiff reserves their right to file any document with the leave of this Hon'ble Court, in the event of any contingencies that may arise after filing the suit. Hence, this suit. More over the defendant remained exparte and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff bank or denying Ex.A1 to A9. Therefore, the case of the plaintiff against the defendant for the above reasons stands proved and as such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant. This point is answered accordingly.

7.Point No.2: In the result, this suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs.9,77.214.99ps/- (Rupees nine lakhs seventy seven thousand two hundred and fourteen and ninety nine paise only) together with interest thereon @ 11.95% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6% per annum till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 21st day of March, 2023.

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: PW1: Neela RajuExparte

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex. A1 Original application dated 17.09.2018,

Ex.A2 Original sanction order dated 17.09.2018.

Ex. A3 Original agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 17.09.2018.

Ex. A4 Original pronote dated 17.09.2018.

Ex. A5 Particulars of hypothecated goods dated 04.10.2018.

Ex. A6 Notice dated 20.02.2019.

Ex. A7 Notice dated 23.03.2021.

Ex. A8 Certified extract of Statement of account along with certificate under

Sec.2A (A), 2A(B) & 2A (C).

Ex.A9 Authorization letter to represent plaintiff.

FOR DEFENDANTS:NIL

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 1

IN THE COURT OF THE VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT; HYDERABAD

Present: SRI N.Keerthi Simha, VII Junior Civil Judge.

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

Monday, this the 20th day of March, 2023.

O.S.No. 3555 of 2022

Between: Canara Bank (eratwhile Syndicate Bank by virtue of the Amalgamation of Syndicate Bank into Canara Bank scheme 2020 made by the Central Government, in exercise of power conferred by Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India), a body corporate constituted and functioning under the banking companies (Acquisition & transfer of undertakings) Act, 1970 having its corporate office situated at 112 3.C. Road, Bengaluru, with branches Act, amongst other places at Ameerpet Branch, Hyderabad District, rep. by its GPA & Chief Manager, Sri Rajneesh Rawat, S/o C.S.Rawat, age 43 years, R/o Hyderabad. Email:cb13039@canarabank.com, Ph: 9440905029.

...Plaintiff

And

M/s Vijay Jewellers, Represented by its Sole Proprietor Sri L.Raju S/o L.Badram, aged about 43 years, Occ: Business, R/o Shop No.7-1-572/1, Near Kanakadurga Hyderabad-500016. PH NO: 9885670246. Temple, Ameerpet,

...Defendant

This suit is coming on 14.03.2023 final hearing before me in the presence of Sri N. Venugoapal Rao, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained ex parte, and the matter having been stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 2

: J U D G M E N T :

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.9,72,137/- (Rupees nine lakhs seventy two thousand one hundred thirty seven only) together with interest thereon @ 19% per annum compounded monthly from the date of suit till the date of realization.

2.The averments of the plaint would demonstrate that the Defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility of

Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) for the purpose of Purchase of Gold for making Ornaments on 24-08-2018, the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the term loan of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) under the suit loan account

No.3039/991/464. On sanctioning the said loan by the Plaintiff-Bank, the

Defendant executed the Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 24-08-2018 .

On execution of documents by the Defendant as above, the Plaintiff-Bank disbursed the proceeds of the said loan amount Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) by remitting the same to the credit of Account No.30391010009529 of the

Defendant as per his instructions. On disbursing the said loan amount by the

Plaintiff-Bank as above. The loan amount was repayable in equated monthly installments of Rs.8,369/-(Rupees eight thousand three hundred and sixty nine only) each, the first installment being due on or before 30-09-2018 and subsequent installments at the same rate due in every month on or before 30th of every month and the last such installment being due on or before 31-08-2025

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 3

as per terms of the Suit Loan Agreement dated 24-08-2018.

On 19-02-2020, the Defendant, as Borrower, approached the Plaintiff-Bank for an overdraft facility to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) for the purpose of Working Capital Needs. After due consideration, on 24-02-2020, the Plaintiff-Bank sanctioned the overdraft facility to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh only) to the Defendant under the suit Loan Account

No.3039/140/1596. On sanctioning the said loan by the Plaintiff-Bank, the

Defendant executed the Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 24-02-2020 and hypothecated the stock-in-trade to the Plaintiff-Bank as security. That the

Plaintiff-Bank allowed the Defendant to operate the said Overdraft Account and the Defendant started operating the said overdraft Account on 26-02-2020. That the Defendant agreed to pay and liquidate the debit balance in the said

Overdraft Account by operating the said Overdraft Account to the extent of limit fixed and bringing the said Overdraft Account to the credit at least once a year and closing it in time by the end of the year as per the terms of the Composite

Hypothecation Agreement dated 24- 02-2020. On 23-06-2020, the Defendant as

Borrower approached the Plaintiff-Bank for a term loan of Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand only) for the purpose of Meeting Operational Expenses. On 23-06- 2020, the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the term loan of Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand only) under the suit loan account. No.3039/916/319. On sanctioning the said loan by the Plaintiff-Bank, the Defendant executed the

Agreement Cum Deed of Hypothecation dated 23-06- 2020. On execution of

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 4

documents by the Defendant as above, the Plaintiff-Bank disbursed the proceeds of the said loan amount Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand only) by remitting the same to the credit of Account No.30391010001529 of the Defendant as per his instructions. On disbursing the said loan amount by the Plaintiff-Bank as above, the Defendant duly acknowledged receipt of the said loan amount vide Receipt

dated 23-06-2020. The loan amount was repayable in equated monthly

installments of Rs.2,037/- (Rupees two thousand and thirty seven only) each, the first installment being due on or before 30-06-2021 and subsequent installments at the same rate dan in every month on or before last day of every month and the last such Installment being due on or before 31-05-2024 as per terme of the

Suit Loan Agreement dated 23-06- 2020. Whenever there was variation in the interest rates, the Plaintiff-Bank displayed the same from time to time in the

Notice Board in the Bank Premises. The Defendants also agreed for waiver notice of variation in interest rates. The Defendant failed to honour terms of repayment and failed to repay the said loan amounts. Despite several requests and repeated demands made by the Plaintiff- Bank, the Defendant failed to pay the amounts outstanding due in the three suit loan accounts. The Defendant made part payments on account of debt on 30-09-2019 , 02-10-2020 and 30-09- 2021 under suit loan A/c No.3039/991/464. Consequently, the said three suit loan accounts became Non- Performing Assets (NPAs) and an aggregate sum of

Rs.9,72,137/-(Rupees nine lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and thirty seven only) is outstanding overdue against the Defendant as per the books of accounts duly maintained by the Plaintiff-Bank in the usual and ordinary course

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 5

of its business in the aforesaid three suit loan account. That the Plaintiff-Bank is entitled to recover the said amount of Rs.9,72,137/- (Rupees nine lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and thirty seven only) with subsequent interest, including overdue interest, and the Defendant is liable to pay the same as below -

i) Rs.3,85,013/-(Rupees three lakh eighty five thousand and thirteen only) in the said Term Loan Account No.3039/991/464 with interest at the rate of 13% (thirteen percent) per annum compounded monthly; ii) Rs.5, 30, 570/-(Rupees five lakh thirty thousand five hundred and seventy only) in the Overdraft Account No.3039/140/1596 with interest at the rate of 19% (nineteen percent) per annum compounded monthly; iii) Rs.56,554/- (Rupees fifty six thousand five hundred and fifty four only) in the Term Loan Account No.3039/916/319 with interest at the rate of 13% (thirteen percent) per annum compounded monthly. That the Defendant failed to repay amounts of the suit loans despite several requests and repeated demands. Hence, the suit.

3.Heard the counsel for plaintiff and defendant is set exparte on 27.01.2023 and remained ex parte.

4.To substantiate the case of the plaintiff bank, its Manager is examined

Pw1, and got marked i.e., marked as Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 20.08.2018, Ex. A2 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.08.2018, Ex.A3 Original stamped receipt dated 24.08.2018, Ex.A4 Original

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 6

loan application dated 19.02.2020, Ex. A5 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.02.2020, Ex.A6 Original loan application dated 23.06.2020, Ex. A7 Original Agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 23.06.2020, Ex.A8 Original stamped receipt dated 23.06.2020, Ex. A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 04.07.2022, Ex. A10 Original postal receipt dated 26.07.2022, Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account

No. 3039/991/464 dated 30.06.2022, Ex. A12 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No.3039/140/1596 dated 30.06.2022,Ex. A13

True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No. 3039/916/319

dated 30.06.2022, Ex. A14 Authorization letter dated 14.03.2023.

5.In the light of the submissions, the following points would emerge for consideration namely:

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant as prayed for?

2.To what relief?

6.Point No.1:- The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the averments of the plaint along with material placed on record demonstrate that the defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) for the purpose of Purchase of Gold for making Ornaments on 24-08-2018On execution of documents by the

Defendant as above, the Plaintiff-Bank disbursed the proceeds of the said loan amount Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) by remitting the same to the credit of Account No.30391010009529 of the Defendant as per his instructions. Again on 19-02-2020, the Defendant, as Borrower, approached the Plaintiff-Bank for an overdraft facility to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakh only) for the

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 7

purpose of Working Capital Needs. After due consideration, on 24-02-2020, the

Plaintiff-Bank sanctioned the overdraft facility to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh only) to the Defendant under the suit Loan Account

No.3039/140/1596. Further on 23-06-2020, the Defendant as Borrower approached the Plaintiff-Bank for a term loan of Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand only) for the purpose of Meeting Operational Expenses. On 23-06-2020, the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the term loan of Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand only) under the suit loan account. No.3039/916/319. To substantiate the above three loan sanctions the plaintiff has adduced Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 20.08.2018, Ex. A2 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.08.2018, Ex.A3 Original stamped receipt dated 24.08.2018,

Ex.A4 Original loan application dated 19.02.2020, Ex. A5 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.02.2020, Ex.A6 Original loan application dated 23.06.2020, Ex. A7 Original Agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 23.06.2020, Ex.A8 Original stamped receipt dated 23.06.2020. To prove that there was default in payment the plaintiff has adduced Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No. 3039/991/464 dated 30.06.2022, Ex.

A12 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No.3039/140/1596

dated 30.06.2022 & Ex. A13 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan

account No. 3039/916/319 dated 30.06.2022, on perusal of the same it is found that the Defendant failed to honour terms of repayment and failed to repay the said loan amounts. As the Defendant failed to honour the terms of payment of the three loan accounts, the Plaintiff-Bank made several requests and repeated

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 8

demands for payment of the suit Ioan amounts outstanding against the Defendant in the said loan accounts. Despite several requests and repeated demands made by the Plaintiff- Bank, the Defendant failed to pay the amounts outstanding due in the three suit loan accounts. Further on perusal of the material on record it is found that the said three suit loan accounts became Non- Performing Assets (NPAs) and an aggregate sum of Rs.9,72, 137/-(Rupees nine lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and thirty seven only) Thus it is found that the Plaintiff-

Bank is entitled to recover the said amount of Rs.9,72,137/-(Rupees nine lakh seventy two thousand one hundred and thirty seven only) with subsequent interest, including overdue interest, and the Defendant is liable to pay the same as below -

i) Rs.3,85,013/-(Rupees three lakh eighty five thousand and thirteen only) in the said Term Loan Account No.3039/991/464 with interest at the rate of 13% (thirteen percent) per annum compounded monthly; ii) Rs.5,30,570/-(Rupees five lakh thirty thousand five hundred and seventy only) in the Overdraft Account No.3039/140/1596 with interest at the rate of 19% (nineteen percent) per annum compounded monthly; iii) Rs.56,554/-(Rupees fifty six thousand five hundred and fifty four only) in the Term Loan Account No.3039/916/319 with interest at the rate of13% (thirteen percent) per annum compounded monthly:

Further on perusal of Ex. A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 04.07.2022, Ex. A10 Original postal receipt dated 26.07.2022, it is found that the Plaintiff got issued the legal notice dated 04-07-2022, by registered post

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 9

with acknowledgment due, demanding the Defendant to pay the suit claim amount. But, the Defendant failed to pay the same till date in spite of receipt of the said notice. Moreover, the defendant remained ex parte and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff bank or denying Ex.A1 to A14.

Therefore, the case of the plaintiff against the defendant for the above reasons stands proved and as such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant. This point is answered accordingly.

7.Point No.2: In the result, this suit is decreed with costs in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs. 9,72,137/- (Rupees nine lakhs seventy two thousand one hundred thirty seven only) together with interest thereon @ 19% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6% per annum till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 20th day of March, 2023.

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: PW1:Mekala JashwanthExparte

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 20.08.2018.

Ex. A2 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.08.2018.

OS.No.3555/2022 PAGE No. 10

Ex.A3 Original stamped receipt dated 24.08.2018.

Ex.A4 Original loan application dated 19.02.2020.

Ex. A5 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 24.02.2020.

Ex.A6 Original loan application dated 23.06.2020.

Ex. A7 Original Agreement cum deed of hypothecation dated 23.06.2020.

Ex.A8 Original stamped receipt dated 23.06.2020.

Ex. A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 04.07.2022.

Ex. A10 Original postal receipt dated 26.07.2022.

Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No. 3039/991/464 dated 30.06.2022

Ex. A12 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No.3039/140/1596 dated 30.06.2022.

Ex. A13 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account No. 3039/916/319 dated 30.06.2022.

Ex. A14 Authorization letter dated 14.03.2023

FOR DEFENDANTS:NIL

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 1

IN THE COURT OF THE VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT; HYDERABAD

Present: SRI N.Keerthi Simha, VII Junior Civil Judge.

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

Monday, this the 20th day of March, 2023.

O.S.No. 1384 of 2022

Between: Canara Bank (erstwhile Syndicate Bank by virtue of the Amalgamation of Syndicate Bank into Canara Bank Scheme 2020 made by the Central Government, in exercise of power conferred by Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India), a body corporate constituted and functioning under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 having its corporate office situated at 112 J.C. Road, Bengaluru, with branches amongst other places at Abids, Hyderabad District, rep. by its Senior Manager, Sri Mamidi Mangapathi Rao S/o Late Sri Mamidi Jagan, age 36 years, R/o Hyderabad. Email: cb13029@canarabank.com, Ph:9440905023.

...Plaintiff

And

1.Sri K. Prabhakar S/o K. Manikyam, aged about 53 years, Occ: Employee, R/o 5-9-895, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad-500001. PH NO: 9642278200.

2.Smt Tasleem Sultana W/o Mohd Afzaluddin, aged about 63 years, Occ: Employee, R/o 3-9-16/2, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad. PH NO: 040-2346550.

...Defendants

This suit coming on 13.03.2023 final hearing before me in the presence of Sri N. Venugoapal Rao, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained exparte, and the matter having been stood

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 2

over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

: J U D G M E N T :

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,08,183/- (Rupees four lakhs eight two thousand one hundred eighty three only) together with interest thereon @13% per annum compounded monthly from the date of suit till the date of realization.

2.The averments of the plaint would demonstrate that the Defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility on 13-07- 2009 for a loan of Rs.1,75,000/-(Rupees one lakh seventy five thousand only) for the purpose of Medical Treatment. The said Smt. K. Shanthi Sree offered the second Defendant as surety for the due repayment of the said loan amount. That the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the loan for the sum of Rs.1,50,000/-(Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) on 30-07- 2009 under the suit loan account

No.3029/717/25435. On sanctioning the said loan by the Plaintiff-Bank, the said

Smt. K. Shanthi Sree as Borrower executed the General Agreement and the second Defendant as Surety executed the Guarantee Agreement dated 30-07- 2009. On execution of documents by the said Smt K.Shanthi Sree and the second

Defendant as above, the Plaintiff-Bank disbursed the said loan amount by remitting the name to the credit of Account No.201/16033 of the said Sat K.

Shanthi Sree as per the instructions. On disbursing the said loan amount by the

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 3

Plaintiff-Bank as above, the said Smt. K. Shanthi Sree duly acknowledged receipt of the said loan amount vide Receipt dated 30-07-2009. The said Smt K.Shanthi

Sree and second Defendant agreed to repay the Plaintiff Bank the said loan amount with interest in equated monthly installments of Rs.3,400/-(Rupees three thousand four hundred only) each, the first installment being due on 30-08-2009 and subsequent installments at the same rate due in every month on or before 30th of every month and the last installment being due on or before 30-07-2014 as per terms of the Loan Agreement dated 30-07- 2009. The Plaintiff- Bank submits that whenever there was variation in the interest rates, the Plaintiff-Bank displayed the same in Notice Board in the Bank premises. The said Borrower and the Defendants also agreed for waiver of notice of variation in interest rates.

Subsequently the said Borrower Smit K.Shanthi Sree, expired leaving behind the first, Defendant who is her husband, respectively, as the only legal heir. The entire estate of the said Borrower Smt K.Shanthi Sree has been developed upon the first, Defendant and he has been enjoying the same. Hence, the first,

Defendant is also liable to pay the suit claim, The Defendants failed to honour terms of the suit loan agreement and also failed to repay the suit loan amount and as a result a sum of Rs.4,08,183/-(Rupees four lakh eight thousand one hundred and eighty three only) remained outstanding overdue in the said loan account as on 28-02-2022, after adjusting all payments, if any, made by the defendants to the credit of the said loan account. In spite of several requests and repeated demands made by the plaintiff-bank, both the defendants failed to

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 4

repay the suit loan amount, the Smt K. Shanthi Sree made party payments debt on 31-12-2010 and 12-11-2011 and the first Defendant acknowledgment of debt on 17-01-2012 and the first defendant made part payments on account of debt on 30-03-2013 and the first Defendant acknowledgment of debt on 10-01-2015 and the first Defendant made part payments on account of debt on 23-03-2015 and 18-06-2016 and the first Defendant acknowledgment of debt on 08-01-2018 and 06-01-2021, which is binding on both the Defendants as per of the terms of loan agreement. The Plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit loan amount with the prevailing rate of interest, including overdue interest, at the rate of 13 per cent per annum with monthly rests from the date of the suit and all the Defendants are, Jointly and severally, liable to pay the suit loan amount, i.e,. Rs. 4,08, 183/-(Rupees four lakh eight thousand one hundred and eighty three only) with future interest at the rate of 13 per cent per annum compounded monthly. On 16-03-2022 the Plaintiff issued the legal notice dated 28-02- 2022, by registered post with acknowledgement due, demanding both the defendants to pay the suit loan amount. But in spite of receipt of the said notice, the Defendants failed to pay the suit loan amount till date. The Plaintiff-Bank is following prudential accounting norms as per the guidelines issued by the RBI from time to time. In the normal course, interest as and when it falls due is debited to the Borrower's account. An extract of Statement of Account of the loan account of the all the

Defendants duly certified under Bankers Book Evidence Act is filed along with the Plaint and the same may be treated as part and parcel of the Plaint. The

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 5

Defendants failed to repay the above loan amount despite several requests and repeated demands. Hence, the suit.

3.Heard the counsel for plaintiff and defendant is set exparte on 08.02.2023 and remained ex parte.

4.To substantiate the case of the plaintiff bank, its Manager is examined

Pw1, and got marked i.e., marked as Ex. A1 Original loan application cum sanction dated 13.07.2009, Ex. A2 General agreement of D1 dated 30.07.2009,

Ex. A3 Original guarantee agreement of D2 dated 30.07.2009, Ex.A4 Original

Stamped receipt of D1 dated 30.07.2009, Ex. A5 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 17.01.2012, Ex.A6 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1

dated 10.01.2015, Ex. A7 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated

08.01.2018, Ex.A8 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 06.01.2021,

Ex.A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 28.02.2022, Ex.A10 Postal receipts (2 in number) dated 16.03.2022, Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account dated 28.02.2022.

5.In the light of the submissions, the following points would emerge for consideration namely:

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant as prayed for?

2.To what relief?

6.Point No.1:- The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the averments of the plaint along with material placed on record demonstrate that the defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility on 13-07-

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 6

2009 for a loan of Rs.1,75,000/-(Rupees one lakh seventy five thousand only) for the purpose of Medical Treatment and the same is substantiated by Ex. A1

Original loan application cum sanction dated 13.07.2009. On perusal of the Ex.

A3 Original guarantee agreement of D2 dated 30.07.2009,it is fo9und that one

Smt. K. Shanthi Sree offered the second Defendant as surety for the due repayment of the said loan amount. Further on perusal of Ex.A4 Original

Stamped receipt of D1 dated 30.07.2009, Ex. A5 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 17.01.2012, Ex.A6 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1

dated 10.01.2015, Ex. A7 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated

08.01.2018, Ex.A8 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 06.01.2021 it is proved that the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the loan for the sum of

Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) on 30-07- 2009 under the suit loan account No.3029/717/25435. It is pleaded by the plaintiff that subsequently the said Borrower Smit K.Shanthi Sree, expired leaving behind the first, Defendant who is her husband, respectively, as the only legal heir. it is the contention of the plaintiff that the entire estate of the said Borrower Smt

K.Shanthi Sree has been developed upon the first Defendant and he has been enjoying the same. Thus it is contended that Defendant is also liable to pay the suit claim, further on perusal of Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account dated 28.02.2022 it is found that Defendants failed to honour terms of the suit loan agreement and also failed to repay the suit loan amount and as a result a sum of Rs.4,08,183/-(Rupees four lakh eight thousand one

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 7

hundred and eighty three only) remained outstanding overdue in the said loan account as on 28-02-2022. Furthermore on perusal of Ex.A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 28.02.2022, Ex.A10 Postal receipts (2 in number) dated 16.03.2022,

On 16-03-2022 it is proved that the Plaintiff got issued the legal notice dated 28-02-2022, by registered post with acknowledgment due, demanding both the defendants to pay the suit loan amount. But in spite of receipt of the said notice, the Defendants failed to pay the suit loan amount till date. Thus, it is proved that the Defendants failed to repay the above loan amount despite several requests and repeated demands. Hence, the suit. Moreover, the defendant remained ex parte and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff bank or denying Ex.A1 to A11. Therefore, the case of the plaintiff against the defendant for the above reasons stands proved and as such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant. This point is answered accordingly.

7.Point No.2: In the result, this suit is decreed with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs.4,08,183/- (Rupees four lakhs eight thousand one hundred eighty three only) together with interest thereon @ 13% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6% per annum till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 20th day of March, 2023.

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS.No.1384/2022 PAGE No. 8

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: PW1: Mamidi Mangapathi RaoExparte

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex. A1 Original loan application cum sanction dated 13.07.2009.

Ex. A2 General agreement of D1 dated 30.07.2009.

Ex. A3 Original guarantee agreement of D2 dated 30.07.2009.

Ex.A4 Original Stamped receipt of D1 dated 30.07.2009.

Ex. A5 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 17.01.2012.

Ex.A6 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 10.01.2015.

Ex. A7 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 08.01.2018.

Ex.A8 Original acknowledgment of debt of D1 dated 06.01.2021.

Ex.A9 Office copy of legal notice dated 28.02.2022.

Ex.A10 Postal receipts (2 in number) dated 16.03.2022.

Ex. A11 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account dated 28.02.2022.

FOR DEFENDANTS:NIL

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

IN THE COURT OF THE VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT; HYDERABAD

Present: SRI N.Keerthi Simha, VII Junior Civil Judge.

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

Thursday, this the 23rd day of March, 2023.

O.S.No. 5384 of 2022

Between:

ASRA SHIREEN

W/O: MOHAMMED ARIF HUSSAIN, Aged about: 28 Yrs, Occ: House Hold, R/o: H. No.18-14-144. GM Nagar,

Kanchanbagh, Hyderabad. ...Plaintiff

And

THE REGIONAL PASS PORT OFFICER.

Office of the R.P.O Hyderabad, Shaikpet, Tolichowki, Hyderabad, 500008

...Defendant

This suit coming on 20.03.2023 final hearing before me in the presence of Sri Ibad ur Rahman khan, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained exparte, and the matter having been stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

: J U D G M E N T :

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant to correct the date of birth of the plaintiff in her passport bearing no. Z4602432 as 06-06- 1994 instead of 06-01-1989 the correct date of birth is mention in the sec- ondary school certificate, PAN Card as well as in Aadhaar Card and issue the Pass Port with correct date of birth till the date of realization.

2.The averments of the plaint would demonstrate that the Plaintiff (father) approached the Defendant for issue of pass port in the year of 2010 through

Agent at the office of the defendant. The defendant issued a Pass Port bearing no. H8636809 on 28-04-2010 the Pass Port was valid upto 27-04-2020. That the Plaintiff being a house wife was not given custody of the same and the same was kept under the control of her father for safe custody. Subsequently the

Plaintiff got married to Mohammed Arif Hussain and the name of husband was got added in the passport by applying for the same through an agent and another passport was issued by the Defendant vide passport No. 19816764 and since then the passport was in the custody of her husband. That subsequently she travelled abroad for four times under the care and custody of her husband

Mohammed Arif Hussain as such she did not happen to see the passport. The original passport was kept away from the Plaintiff and she did not have occasion to notice error or to have independent custody of her passport in the past. It is submitted that the passport of the Plaintiff was again renewed on 21-03-2019 vide passport No. Z4602432 under the care and custody of her husband and the same was also in the care and custody of her husband. Things stood thus the

Plaintiff wanted to pursue higher education and she took the custody of her passport in the month of November 2022 when she wanted to apply for higher education. While the plaintiff was filing application for she was informed about the wrong date of birth as such noticed an error in the date of birth mentioned in the Pass Port. When she enquired about she was informed to approach the

Defendant's office. The Plaintiff along with her husband approached the office of the Defendant on 29-11-2022 and asked the executive to correct the date of birth in her Pass Port but she was told to bring a Declaratory Decree from the competent civil court for making correction of the date of birth in the pass port.

The Plaintiff is intending to pursue higher education as such she is willing to go abroad for the same and she needs a Pass Port with true and correct date of birth. The correct date of birth of the Plaintiff is 06-06-1994 the same is mentioned in the Secondary School certificate, Aadhar Card and PAN Card of the

Plaintiff. The Pass Port contains wrong date of birth Le. 06-01-1989 the same needs to be corrected. The copies of all the Documents are filed along with the plaint for the perusal of this court. The date of birth of the Plaintiff was not noticed by her as the Pass Port was applied and obtained by the husband of the plaintiff through an agent and was not in the custody of Plaintiff as such the plaintiff was not having any opportunity to notice the error in Date of Birth.That the plaintiff is directed to approach the appropriate Civil Court and get a

Declaratory Order for correcting the date of birth in the pass port as per Section 5 of the Pass Port Act the defect in Date of birth may be treated as a technical defect and can be cured if there is no contradiction in the date of birth shown by two competent authorities. The plaintiff showed all the documents including educational certificate showing correct date of birth and showed that there is no contradiction in mention of date of birth. The concerned officer reluctantly refused to effect the correction in the date of birth and asked the Plaintiff to get a declaratory order from the Hon'ble court. The plaintiff has no option except to approach the Hon'ble court for necessary relief as stated supra. Hence this suit

3.Heard the counsel for plaintiff and defendant is set exparte on 23.02.2023 and remained ex parte.

4.To substantiate the case of the plaintiff bank, its Manager is examined

Pw1, and got marked A1 to A6 i.e., Ex.A1 Original Aadhar card, Ex.A2

Original SSC certificate issued by Board of Secondary Education, Ex.A3

Original passport bearing No. H8636809, Ex.A4 Original passport bearing No.

J9816764, Ex.A5 Original passport bearing No. 74602432, Ex.A6 Original pan card.

5.In the light of the submissions, the following points would emerge for consideration namely:

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant as prayed for?

2.To what relief?

6.Point No.1:- The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the averments of the plaint along with material placed on record demonstrate that the

Plaintiff approached the Defendant for issue of pass port in the year of 2010.

and the same is substantiated by Ex.A1 Original Aadhar card, Ex.A2 Original

SSC certificate issued by Board of Secondary Education, Ex.A3 Original passport bearing No. H8636809, Ex.A4 Original passport bearing No. J9816764, Ex.A5

Original passport bearing No. 74602432,Ex.A6 Original pan card. Through Agent at the office of the defendant. The defendant issued a Pass Port bearing no.

H8636809 on 28-04-2010 the Pass Port was valid upto 27-04-2020. That the

Plaintiff being a house wife was not given custody of the same and the same was kept under the control of her father for safe custody. Subsequently the

Plaintiff got married to Mohammed Arif Hussain and the name of husband was got added in the passport by applying for the same through an agent and another passport was issued by the Defendant vide passport No. 19816764 and since then the passport was in the custody of her husband. That subsequently she travelled abroad for four times under the care and custody of her husband

Mohammed Arif Hussain as such she did not happen to see the passport. The original passport was kept away from the Plaintiff and she did not have occasion to notice error or to have independent custody of her passport in the past. It is submitted that the passport of the Plaintiff was again renewed on 21-03-2019 vide passport No. Z4602432 under the care and custody of her husband and the same was also in the care and custody of her husband. . Things stood thus the

Plaintiff wanted to pursue higher education and she took the custody of her passport in the month of November 2022 when she wanted to apply for higher education. While the plaintiff was filing application for she was informed about the wrong date of birth as such noticed an error in the date of birth mentioned in the Pass Port. When she enquired about she was informed to approach the

Defendant's office. The Plaintiff along with her husband approached the office of the Defendant on 29-11-2022 and asked the executive to correct the date of birth in her Pass Port but she was told to bring a Declaratory Decree from the competent civil court for making correction of the date of birth in the pass port.

The Plaintiff is intending to pursue higher education as such she is willing to go abroad for the same and she needs a Pass Port with true and correct date of birth. The correct date of birth of the Plaintiff is 06-06-1994 the same is mentioned in the Secondary School certificate, Aadhar Card and PAN Card of the

Plaintiff. The Pass Port contains wrong date of birth Le. 06-01-1989 the same needs to be corrected. The copies of all the Documents are filed along with the plaint for the perusal of this court. The date of birth of the Plaintiff was not noticed by her as the Pass Port was applied and obtained by the husband of the plaintiff through an agent and was not in the custody of Plaintiff as such the plaintiff was not having any opportunity to notice the error in Date of Birth.That the plaintiff is directed to approach the appropriate Civil Court and get a

Declaratory Order for correcting the date of birth in the pass port as per Section 5 of the Pass Port Act the defect in Date of birth may be treated as a technical defect and can be cured if there is no contradiction in the date of birth shown by two competent authorities. The plaintiff showed all the documents including educational certificate showing correct date of birth and showed that there is no contradiction in mention of date of birth. The concerned officer reluctantly refused to effect the correction in the date of birth and asked the Plaintiff to get a declaratory order from the Hon'ble court. The plaintiff has no option except to approach the Hon'ble court for necessary relief as stated supra. Hence this suit.

More over the defendant remained exparte and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff bank or denying Ex.A1 to A7. Therefore, the case of the plaintiff against the defendant for the above reasons stands proved and as such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant. This point is answered accordingly.

7.Point No.2: In the result, this suit is decreed without costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant to correct the date of birth of the plaintiff in her passport bearing no. Z4602432 as 06-06-1994 instead of 06-01-1989 the correct date of birth is mention in the secondary school certificate, PAN Card as well as in Aadhaar Card and issue the Pass Port with correct date of birth till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 23rd day of March, 2023.

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: PW1: Asra ShireenExparte

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex.A1 Original Aadhar card.

Ex.A2 Original SSC certificate issued by Board of Secondary Education.

Ex.A3 Original passport bearing No. H8636809.

Ex.A4 Original passport bearing No. J9816764.

Ex.A5 Original passport bearing No. 74602432.

Ex.A6 Original pan card.

FOR DEFENDANT:NIL

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 1

IN THE COURT OF THE VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT; HYDERABAD

Present: SRI N.Keerthi Simha, VII Junior Civil Judge.

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

Monday, this the 20th day of March, 2023.

O.S.No. 2937 of 2020

Between: Canara Bank (erstwhile Syndicate Bank by virtu of the Amagamation of Syndicate Bank into Canara Bank scheme 2020 made by the Central Government, in exercise of power conferred by Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of Indial, body corporate constituted and functioning under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1010 having its Corporate office situated at 112 3.C. Road, Bengaluru, with branches amongst other places at Tolichowki, Hyderabad District, rep. by its Senior Manager, Smt P. Prathibha w/o Sri M.N.S.R.Sudhakar, age 34 years, R/o Hyderabad. Email:cb13054@canarabank.com, Ph: 9440905041.

...Plaintiff

And

Mr.Syed Moiz S/o Late Syed Mehboob, aged about 32 years, car Driver, R/o 9-10-382/17, Risala Bazar, Golconda, Hyderabad- 500008. PH NO: 9949943652.

...Defendant

This suit is coming on 13.03.2023 final hearing before me in the presence of Sri N. Venugoapal Rao, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant remained ex parte, and the matter having been stood over till this day for consideration, this Court delivered the following:

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 2

: J U D G M E N T :

This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,21,014/- (Rupees four lakhs twenty one thousand and fourteen only) together with interest thereon @ 13% per annum compounded monthly from the date of suit till the date of realization.

2.The averments of the plaint would demonstrate that the Defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility on 29-01- 2016 for a loan of Rs.4,40,000/-(Rupees four lakh forty thousand only) for the purpose of purchasing Four wheeler (Purchase of New TATA Indica V2 Ls Car for

Taxi Services). The Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the loan for a sum of

Rs.4,40,000/-(Rupees four lakh forty thousand only) on 01-02-2016 under the suit loan account No.3054/791/750. On sanctioning the said loan by the Plaintiff-

Bank, the Defendant executed Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 01-02- 2016. on execution of documents by the Defendant as above, the Plaintiff-Bank disbursed the name to the credit of the said loan amount by ronitting Account

No. 305.201.71339 of the Defendant as per his instruction on disbursing the said

Joan amount by the plaintiff-Bank af above, the Defendant acknowledged receipt of the said loan amount vide Receipt dated on 01-02-2016. That the Defendant agreed to repay the Plaintiff-Bank the said loan amount with interest in equated monthly installments of Rs.9,761.76/-(Rupees nine thousand seven hundred and sixty one and paisa seventy six only each, the first installment being due on 31-

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 3

03-2016 and subsequent installments at the same rate due in every month on or

before 31" of every month and the last Installment being due on or before 31-

01-2021 as per terms of the Loan Agreement dated 01-02-2016. That the

Defendant hypothecated Four wheeler Vehicle (TATA Indica V2 Ls car) bearing

Registration No. TS 13 UA 5565, to the Plaintiff-Bank as security for the due repayment of the said loan amount. The Defendant failed to honour terms of the suit loan agreement and also failed to repay the suit loan amount. As a result a sum of Rs.4,21,014/-(Rupees four lakh twenty one thousand and fourteen only) remained outstanding overdue in the said loan account as on 31-10-2020, after adjusting all payments, if any, made by the defendant to the credit of the said loan account. That in spite of several requests and repeated demands made by the plaintiff-bank, the Defendant failed to repay the suit loan amount, the

Defendant made part payments on account of the debt on 31-10-2016, 07-12- 2017, 05-01-2018 and 21-05-2018. That the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit Loan amount with prevailing rate of interest, including overdue Interest, at the rate of 13 per cent per annum with monthly rests from the date of suit and the Defendant is liable to pay the suit loan amount. 4,21,014/-(Rupees four lakh twenty one thousand and fourteen only) with future interest at the rate of 13 per cent per annum compounded monthly. That on 20-11-2020 the Plaintiff issued the legal notice dated 27-10- 2020, by registered post with acknowledgment due, demanding the Defendant to pay the suit claim amount. In spite of receipt of the said notice, the Defendant failed to pay the suit claim amount till date. The

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 4

defendants failed to repay the above loan amount despite several requests.

Hence, the suit.

3.Heard the counsel for plaintiff and defendant is set exparte on 13.02.2023 and remained ex parte.

4.To substantiate the case of the plaintiff bank, its Manager is examined

Pw1, and got marked i.e., marked as Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 29.01.2016, Ex. A2 Original letter of sanction dated 01.02.2016, Ex. A3

Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 01.02.2016, Ex. A4

Original stamped receipt dated 01.02.2016, Ex. A5 Office copy of legal notice

dated 27.10.2020, Ex. A6 Original postal receipt dated 20.11.2020, Ex. A7

True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account dated 31.10.2020,

Ex. A8 Authorization letter dated 10.03.2023.

5.In the light of the submissions, the following points would emerge for consideration namely:

1.Whether the plaintiff bank is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant as prayed for?

2.To what relief?

6.Point No.1:- The unchallenged testimony of PW1 and the averments of the plaint along with material placed on record demonstrate that the defendant approached the Plaintiff Bank for financial assistance for loan facility on 29-01- 2016 and the same is substantiated by Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 29.01.2016, Ex. A2 Original letter of sanction dated 01.02.2016, Ex. A3 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 01.02.2016, Ex. A4 Original stamped receipt dated 01.02.2016. On perusal of Ex. A7 True & Certified extract of

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 5

statement of suit loan account dated 31.10.2020 & Ex. A4 Original stamped receipt dated 01.02.2016 it is found that the Plaintiff-Bank duly sanctioned the loan for a sum of Rs.4,40,000/-(Rupees four lakh forty thousand only) on 01-02- 2016 under the suit loan account No.3054/791/750. On perusal of the Ex. A3

Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 01.02.2016, it is proved that the Defendant agreed to repay the Plaintiff-Bank the said loan amount with interest in equated monthly installments. On perusal of the other material on record along with the Ex. A7 it is found that the Defendant failed to honor terms of the suit loan agreement and also failed to repay the suit loan amount.

Thus, it observed that a sum of Rs.4,21,014/-(Rupees four lakh twenty one thousand and fourteen only) remained outstanding overdue in the said loan account as on 31-10-2020. Further on perusal of Ex. A5 Office copy of legal notice dated 27.10.2020 & Ex. A6 Original postal receipt dated 20.11.2020it is proved that Plaintiff got issued the legal notice by registered post with acknowledgmentdue, demanding the Defendant to pay the suit claim amount.

Based on the material placed on record and the contentions put forth by the plaintiff it is found that the defendant failed to repay the above loan amount despite several requests. Moreover, the defendant remained ex parte and did not choose to challenge the case of the plaintiff bank or denying Ex.A1 to A8.

Therefore, the case of the plaintiff against the defendant for the above reasons stands proved and as such the plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount from the defendant. This point is answered accordingly.

OS.No.2937/2020 PAGE No. 6

7.Point No.2: In the result, this suit is decreed with costs in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs. 4,21,014/- (Rupees Four

Lakhs TwentyOne Thousand and fourteen only) together with interest thereon @ 13% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter future interest @ 6% per annum till the date of realization.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 20th day of March, 2023.

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

FOR PLAINTIFF: FOR DEFENDANT: PW1:Anusha JonnalagaddaEx Parte

DOCUMENTS MARKED

FOR PLAINTIFF: Ex. A1 Original loan application dated 29.01.2016.

Ex. A2 Original letter of sanction dated 01.02.2016.

Ex. A3 Original composite hypothecation agreement dated 01.02.2016.

Ex. A4 Original stamped receipt dated 01.02.2016.

Ex. A5 Office copy of legal notice dated 27.10.2020.

Ex. A6 Original postal receipt dated 20.11.2020

Ex. A7 True & Certified extract of statement of suit loan account dated 31.10.2020.

Ex. A8 Authorization letter dated 10.03.2023.

FOR DEFENDANTS:NIL

VII JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE

CITY CIVIL COURT, HYDERABAD