*1* ss.1195.09.gurantr kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.1195 OF 2009 State Bank of India. ..Plaintiff -Versus- Madhura M. Nagarkar and another. ..Defendants .......... Prasad Das a/w Amol Arote i/b Goenka Law Associates, for the Plaintiff. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 26th November, 2010. P.C. 1 The Plaintiff bank sanctioned a personal loan to the Defendant No.1 on the basis of the documents including the personal loan application, letter of sanction and the arrangement letter. The Defendant No.2 guaranteed this loan and executed a deed of guarantee. 2 The amount of loan is duly reflected in the statement of account maintained by the Plaintiff bank in its ordinary and regular course of business. The amount was not paid on the due date, therefore, the demand notice was addressed to the Defendants. However, the amount of loan was not repaid by the Defendants. Thus, the Plaintiff bank has filed this summary suit. 3 In such circumstances, I am satisfied that this suit is maintainable as a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code. The claim of the Plaintiff is within limitation. Further the Defendants are residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. 4 For all these reasons, the original documents and the affidavit proving service are taken on record and marked “X” and “X-1” respectively *2* ss.1195.09.gurantr for identification. There will be a decree as prayed for. The Advocate’s costs be computed as per rules. Refund of the Court fees as per rules. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)