STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. KHUSHAL SINGH TANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 26.3.1997 whereby the trial court dismissed the suit filed by the appellant bank for recovery of Rs.2,28,746.77.

(2.) THE respondent no.1 approached the appellant bank for grant of medium term loan for purchasing a bus. THE respondent no.1 executed the necessary security documents being Ex.P-1 to P-5 on 19.5.1983. THE defendants thereafter also signed the acknowledgment of debt forms on different dates which have also been proved and exhibited being 31.12.1983 (Ex.P-10), 31.12.1984 (Ex.P-11), 20.10.1985 (Ex.P-12) and revival letters dated 6.5.1986 by the principal borrower and the guarantor respectively (Ex.P-13 and P-14). THE statement of account has been proved in this case as Ex.P-22. On account of default of the respondent no.1 to maintain financial discipline and failing to pay the amount on the due date, the amount became was transferred to the recalled debt account on 22.10.1985. As from this date, there are two accounts which were being maintained, the first being the main loan account which contains the entries in the credit side and the corresponding debit entries in the recalled debt account. Meaning thereby, there is only one debit entry for different transactions from 22.10.1985 although there are two separate accounts but there is no duplication of the debit entries. THEre are certain other debit entries in the recalled debt account by which credit of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the borrower in cash on 23.5.1987 has been shown and debits have been shown towards Deposit Insurance Credit Guarantee Corporation fees, legal notice fee, court fee etc. THE total of this amount was claimed in the suit.

(3.) SO far as the dismissal of the suit on account of no cause of action is concerned, the same is also clearly without any basis. Merely because no legal notice has been served would not mean that the cause of action does not accrue. The cause of action accrues on the disbursal of the loan and the failure of the borrower and the guarantor to pay the same. SOme discrepancies in the plaint of stating an amount of Rs.2,28,746.77 instead of the amount of Rs.2,28,246.77 as shown in the statement of account cannot mean that there is no cause of action. Further, an amount due which is shown in the balance confirmation letter need not be reflected in the statement of account because statement of account will only contain entries pertaining to actual debits and credits. A balance confirmation is the amount due on the particular date which is written on the balance confirmation letter and on which date no entry need be made in the statement of account. The learned trial court has therefore erred on this account also.