LAXMI NARAIN Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 25.01.08, rendered by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jind, vide which, it decreed the suit of the plaintiff/respondent, and the judgement and RSA No. 4052 of 2008 2 decree dated 01.09.08, rendered by the Court of Additional District Judge- III, Jind, vide which, it dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff/respondent, and accepted the cross-appeal of the defendants/appellants, to the extent of modifying the pendente lite and future interest @ 6% p.a., instead of 6% p.a. with half yearly interest awarded by the trial Court.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that, Laxmi Narain (since deceased), and Raj Kumar, defendants/appellants, approached the plaintiff bank, plaintiff/respondent, on 07.02.96, and moved an application, for the grant of loan, for the purchase of tractor, for agricultural purposes. The plaintiff bank, on the written request of the defendants, sanctioned the agriculture term loan, in the sum of Rs. 1,69,000/-, on 19.02.96, for the aforesaid purpose. A hypothecation agreement, dated 14.12.96, and registered mortgage deed No. 651, dated 08.02.96, were executed, by the defendants, in favour of the plaintiff bank, vide which, they mortgaged their land. As per the agreement, the aforesaid loan amount, was to be repaid, in 18 half yearly instalments of Rs. 9700/- each, alongwith interest, as first instalment, and Rs. 9400/- each, alongwith interest, as second instalment, and so on, till the entire payment of the amount. The defendants also agreed to pay interest @ 2.5 per cent above/below the State Bank advance rate, rising and falling therewith with a minimum of 14 per cent per annum, with half yearly rests or any other rate of interest, varied by the plaintiff bank, under the directions and instructions of the Reserve Bank of India. However, subsequently, the defendants, failed to repay the loan amount, alongwith the agreed rate of interest. They were asked, many a time, to honour their commitment, but to no avail. Ultimately, a suit for recovery, was filed.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were struck:- (i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for recovery of suit amount alongwith interest, as prayed? OPP (ii) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is within limitation of time? OPP (iii) Relief.