SYNDICATE BANK Vs. SATYA ELECTRIC COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Is a suit for recovery of a sum of Ra. 1,97,754.26 P. together with pendente lite and future interest. ' -

(2.) Briefly stated the caw of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff if a banking company duly constituted under the Banking Companies (Acqbisition and transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 with its head office at Manipal, South Canara District of Karnataka State and with branches all over India amongst other places at Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Shri U.N. Bakshi is the Chief Manager and Principal Officer of the aforesaid bank situated at Chandni Chowk, Delhi. He is also duly constituted attorney of the plaintiff banking and he is as such entitled to institute the suit and to sign and verify the plaint.

(3.) Defendant No. 1 is a partnership firm and defendants No. 2 and 3 are its partners. The defendant No. 1 through its partners, 1.e" defendant No. 2 and 3 approached the plaintiff bank for the grant of overdraft facility to the tune of Rs. 90,000.00 in the month of November, 1985. The said facility was granted to the defendant No. I on their executing the documents mentioned In para 4 of the plaint on 5-11-1985. The defendants agreed to pay interest at the rate of 35 upto Rs. 48.000.00 and at the rate of 7.5% on the balance amount per annum over and above the Reserve Bank of India rate with a minimum of 13% upto Rs. 48,000.00 and 17.5% on the balance amount. The defendants authorised the plaintiff bank to honour all the cheques and transactions on behalf of the defendant No. 1 by either of defendants 2 and 3. The defendants agreed to pay overdue interest at 2.5% per annum or at such rate as may be charged by the Bank from time to time on the amounts over due in case of default. The defendants after the sanction of the above loan facility again requested the plaintiff vide their letter dated 3-1-86 enclosed with the plaint to enhance the said limit from Rs. 90,000.00 to Rs. l,40,000.00 on the basis of term deposit of Rs. 50.000.00 given by the defendants as security. The plaintiff at the request of the defendants enhanced the limit from Rs. 90,000.00 to Rs. l,40,000.00 vide their letter dated 3-1-1986. The defendants again vide their letter dated 4-4-1986 and 1-7-1986 requested the plaintiff bank to that the said limit of Rs. 1,40,000.00 be further enhanced by Rs. 1,65,000.00 . The defendants again approached the plaintiff to enhance the said limit from Rs. 1,65,000.00 to Rs. 2,55,000/. It was again acceeded to. The defendants pay the said loan facilities. Plaintiff bank on the failure of the defendants to availed to close their Ilability adjusted the security furnished by them against their debt. The defendants failed the clear their loan account despite repeated requests. Hence, they were served with a legal notice dated 17-11-1987 after having adjusted the security deposited by the defendants with the plaintiff and after calculating interest of the bank rates sum of Rs. 1,97,754.26 P. has bean found due from the defendants as on 20-10-1988. The defendants are further liable to pay pendents life and future interest at the rate of 18.5^ per annum. Hence, arose the necessity of institution of the present salt.