UCO BANK Vs. MAHESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff Bank -appellant herein has directed the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated March 15, 1988 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Suit No. 80 of 1986. The plaintiff -bank sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 2,56,000 in favour of defendant Mahesh Kumar on 16 -10 -1981 and 17 -11 -1981 for the purchase of Leyland Tuskar Truck bearing Engine No. 119309, Chassis Number D -135871 which was subsequently registered No. HPN -2050 Defendants 1 to 3 executed a memorandum of agreement dated 26 -10 -1981 Defendants 2 and 3 stood as guarantors for defendant No.1. The amount of cash credit was repayable along with interest at the rate of 12 -1/2% per annum with quarterly rests. The defendants, however, failed to repay the loan amount as per terms and conditions agreed upon between the parties. The plaintiff -bank accordingly filed a suit for recovery of the amount of Rs, 2,56,000 along with interest thereon at the rate of 12 -1/2% per annum with quarterly rests.

(2.) Though the suit of the plaintiff was reisted and contested by defendants 1 and 3 initially by filing joint written statement. Defendant No. 2 did not choose to appear and contest the suit and hence proceeded exparte. On 15 -3 -1988 defendant Mahesh Kumar appeared and admitted the claim of the plaintiff and consented to a decreed for Rs 3,89,626.41 P. However, he made a statement that he shall not be charged any future interest. He, however, prayed that he may be allowed to any a sum of Rs, 50,000 by end of June 1988 and subsequently from July 1988 he shall pay monthly instalments of Rs 50,003 till the entire decretal amount was paid.

(3.) On the basis of the statement made by defendant, the learned Single Judge decreed the suit vide impugned judgment and decree dated 15 -3 -1988. A decree for Rs 3,89,62641 Paise with costs was passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. Further simple interest at the rate of 12 -1/2% per annum was allowed from the date of passing of the decree till the payment of the entire decretal amount. The defendants were permitted to pay the decretal amount by instalments as prayed for by the first defendant.