S.B. MAHESHA Vs. CAUVERY KALPATHARU GRAMEENA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the defendant in O.S. No. 4/2013 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channarayapatna, being aggrieved by the order dated 30.10.2013 made on IA filed under Order 13 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC has filed this writ petition.

(2.) THE respondent herein filed a suit in O.S. No. 4/2013 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 8,95,947/ - along with interest. The case of the respondent is that the petitioner availed the loan in the year 2007 for purchase of tractor -trailer. He has to repay the said amount with interest at 12% p.a. in yearly installment of Rs. 52,800/ -. As on the date of filing of the suit, the petitioner was due in a sum of Rs. 10,11,036/ -. In view of the same, suit has been filed for recovery of the said amount. The defendant/petitioner entered appearance. Filed written statement and also an application under Order 13 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC seeking a direction to the plaintiff -Bank to produce documents wherein the Government of Karnataka has waived the agricultural loan in the year 2008. The plaintiff -bank has filed objections to the said application contending that the said document is not available in the bank, The petitioner has taken the loan for the purpose of purchasing the tractor -trailer and sought for dismissal of that application. The trial court after considering the matter in detail held that it is for the defendant to produce necessary documents in support of his case. He cannot call upon the bank to produce documents and accordingly dismissed the said application. Being aggrieved by the order dated 30.10.2013 the defendant in the suit filed this writ petition.

(3.) SRI . N.M. Madhusudhan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent argued in support of the order passed by the trial court and contended that the respondent bank has not received any notification from the State Government nor Reserve Bank of India regarding waiving of the loan advanced for the purpose of purchasing tractor -trailer. In the absence of any notification, the respondent is not in a position to produce the same. Though petitioner availed the loan in the year 2007 either the principal amount nor the interest has been paid. Further this court also issued a direction to the petitioner to deposit the principal amount. That amount is also not deposited. As on today, the petitioner is due for more than Rs. 10 Lakhs. In order to drag on the proceedings, the present application has been filed. The trial court after considering the matter in detail dismissed the application and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.