IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 4534 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4534 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4534 OF 1995 Central Bank of India Central Bank of India Central Bank of India (Mankhurd Branch) ... Plaintiffs (Mankhurd Branch) ... Plaintiffs (Mankhurd Branch) ... Plaintiffs Vs. Vs. Vs. Kalikup Engineering Co. & Anr. Defendants Kalikup Engineering Co. & Anr. Defendants Kalikup Engineering Co. & Anr. Defendants Mr. G. Hariharan i/b. Amin & Hariharan for Plaintiffs. Mr. G. Hariharan i/b. Amin & Hariharan for Plaintiffs. Mr. G. Hariharan i/b. Amin & Hariharan for Plaintiffs. CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. DATE DATE DATE : 4th August,2005. 4th August,2005. 4th August,2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This is an undefended suit as against all the 1. This is an undefended suit as against all the 1. This is an undefended suit as against all the defendants. defendants. defendants. 2. The Plaintiffs have filed the suit for recovery 2. The Plaintiffs have filed the suit for recovery 2. The Plaintiffs have filed the suit for recovery of Rs.76,882.24 along with future interest thereon. of Rs.76,882.24 along with future interest thereon. of Rs.76,882.24 along with future interest thereon. The Defendant No.1 is a firm carrying on business as The Defendant No.1 is a firm carrying on business as The Defendant No.1 is a firm carrying on business as Engineers and the Defendant No.2 is the sole Engineers and the Defendant No.2 is the sole Engineers and the Defendant No.2 is the sole proprietor of Defendant No.1. The Defendants had proprietor of Defendant No.1. The Defendants had proprietor of Defendant No.1. The Defendants had taken loan of Rs.25,000/- and executed promissory note taken loan of Rs.25,000/- and executed promissory note taken loan of Rs.25,000/- and executed promissory note for that amount on 23.5.1990. The Defendants had for that amount on 23.5.1990. The Defendants had for that amount on 23.5.1990. The Defendants had executed promissory note and term loan agreement on executed promissory note and term loan agreement on executed promissory note and term loan agreement on 17th January, 1995. The Defendants had utilised the 17th January, 1995. The Defendants had utilised the 17th January, 1995. The Defendants had utilised the facility and withdrawn the amounts from time to time. facility and withdrawn the amounts from time to time. facility and withdrawn the amounts from time to time. They have failed to pay the amount. The suit was They have failed to pay the amount. The suit was They have failed to pay the amount. The suit was filed for recovery of the amount outstanding from the filed for recovery of the amount outstanding from the filed for recovery of the amount outstanding from the defendants. defendants. defendants. 3. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs states 3. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs states 3. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs states that the original documents are missing and therefore that the original documents are missing and therefore that the original documents are missing and therefore they have filed a certified extract of the account of they have filed a certified extract of the account of they have filed a certified extract of the account of the Defendant no.1 firm to establish the claim against the Defendant no.1 firm to establish the claim against the Defendant no.1 firm to establish the claim against the Defendant No.1 firm. The extract of account of the Defendant No.1 firm. The extract of account of the Defendant No.1 firm. The extract of account of Defendant No.1 firm shows that as on 21.11.1995 the Defendant No.1 firm shows that as on 21.11.1995 the Defendant No.1 firm shows that as on 21.11.1995 the outstanding dues from the Defendants is Rs.76,682.24 outstanding dues from the Defendants is Rs.76,682.24 outstanding dues from the Defendants is Rs.76,682.24 ps. The statement of account shows that last time the ps. The statement of account shows that last time the ps. The statement of account shows that last time the defendants had made payment towards the amount of loan defendants had made payment towards the amount of loan defendants had made payment towards the amount of loan due to them was 10.2.1993 and therefore the suit is due to them was 10.2.1993 and therefore the suit is due to them was 10.2.1993 and therefore the suit is filed in 1995 within limitation. filed in 1995 within limitation. filed in 1995 within limitation. 4. The Suit is, therefore, decreed. The Defendants 4. The Suit is, therefore, decreed. The Defendants 4. The Suit is, therefore, decreed. The Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 shall pay to the Plaintiffs Rs.76,682.24 Nos. 1 and 2 shall pay to the Plaintiffs Rs.76,682.24 Nos. 1 and 2 shall pay to the Plaintiffs Rs.76,682.24 ps. with interest thereon at the rate of 14% per ps. with interest thereon at the rate of 14% per ps. with interest thereon at the rate of 14% per annum from the date of the suit till the recovery of annum from the date of the suit till the recovery of annum from the date of the suit till the recovery of the full amount with costs. the full amount with costs. the full amount with costs. Decree be drawn accordingly. Decree be drawn accordingly. Decree be drawn accordingly. --- --- --- (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.)