STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. THAKUR COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of Rs.2,72,983.98 paise against the defendants. The defendants filed their written statement except defendant No.4 who was proceeded against ex parte on 20.8.1985. On 4.11.1991 counsel appearing for the other defendants except defendant No.4 made a statement that he is not receiving any instructions from the defendants and his appearance may be discharged. On the same date. Court ordered that the defendants be proceeded against ex parte. The ex parte evidence was to be filed by way of affidavit pursuant to the orders passed by the Court. Plaintiff has filed the affidavit of Shri D. N. Arya, Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office Parliament Street, New Delhi, who at the relevant time was the Branch, Manager of the plaintiff-bank at G T Karnal Road, industrial Complex, Delhi-11 00 33 from August 1984 to December 1986. He has deposed that he was the Branch Manager and Principal Officer of the plaintiff-bank at G T Karnal Road, Industrial Complex, Delhi - 11 00 33 and he was well conversant with the facts of the case. He has further stated that he was competent to sign, verify the plains, written statements, petitions, Vakalatnamas, affidavits etc. in terms of the General Regulations of the plaintiff bank. The deponent further stated that on or about 4.11.1981 defendant No.2 as partner of defendant No.1 and for an on behalf of defendant Nos.3 and 4 approached the plaintiff for grant of loan facility in connection with their partnership business of defendant No.1 firm. The cash credit hypothecation limit of Rs. 3 lakhs was granted to the defendants and various documents were executed by the defendants, which include agreement for cash credit (hypothecation of goods) on form 'K' dated 4.11.1981, which is Ex.'P-4'. The statement of hypothecated stocks is Ex.'P-5'.

(2.) A demand promissory note of Rs.3 lakhs dated 4.11.1981 in favour of defendant No.5, who in turn duly endorsed the same in favour of the plaintiff bank for securing repayments, was also executed. The said demand promissory note and the delivery letter dated 4.11.1981, bearing signatures of defendant Nos.2 and

(3.) are Ex. 'P-6' and Ex. 'P-7'. Another guarantee agreement confirming that the defendants would be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount as due as regards the cash credit hypothecation limit of Rs.3 lakhs besides interest. Costs, charges etc., which bears the signatures of defendant Nos.2 to 4, was also executed, which is Ex.'P-8'. Defendant No.5 as guarantor signed and executed a guarantee agreement on the same date confirming that the aforesaid cash credit hypothecation limit of Rs.3 lakhs had been secured by him to the extent of Rs.3 lakhs with interest and the same is Ex.'P-9'. In addition to the foresaid guarantee, defendant No.2 as guarantor as well as partner of defendant No.1 signed and executed an agreement of hypothecation of vehicle as additional security for the cash credit hypothecation limit for Rs.3 lakhs dated 4.11.1981 whereby defendant No.2, hypothecated a truck bearing No.DEG 71 owned by defendant No.2, the said agreement is Ex.'P-10'. Ex.'P-11' is the schedule showing price of the hypothecated vehicle.