1 ss1845-10 vai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.1845 OF 2010 Bank of Baroda ....Plaintiff V/s. Dr.Vijay Kher & Anr. ....Defendants Ms.Purnima Pandit for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 30TH NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C. :- 1. The suit is filed to recover the amounts due under a term loan facility granted by the plaintiff to defendant No.1 and guaranteed by defendant No.2 for purchase of the medical equipment. The usual documents have been executed by the parties including the sanctioned letter, demand promissory note, letter of installments and hypothecation agreement. Defendant No.2 has executed a bank guarantee. The defendants have not entered appearance. They are absent today. 2. Considering the nature of the transaction and the above facts, I do not consider it necessary to permit the plaintiff to lead evidence of their witness. The affidavit in lieu of the examination in 2 ss1845-10 chief of the plaintiff’s witness was therefore, returned. 3. A compilation of documents is tendered in Court, taken on record and marked Exhibit “A” collectively. 4. There is no defence to the suit. There is nothing on record that militates against the averments and submissions in the plaint. 5. In the circumstances, the suit is decreed as prayed. However, interest after the date of the suit shall be at the rate of 12% p.a. on the basis of simple interest and on the principal sum of Rs. 2,89,000/-. Costs to be quantified as per rules. Refund, if any, as per rules.