Anil Sharma (Proprietor M/s Perfect Fire Equipment) 48/55, Gali No.6, Nai Basti Anand Parbat, Central Delhi110055 ........Defendant Date of Institution : 16.09.2023 Date of Final Arguments : 27.01.2025 Date of Judgment : 27.01.2025 Decision : Decreed Judgment 1. This suit is filed by plaintiff bank for recovery of Rs.9,19,714/ alongwith interest @10.7 % per annum as unpaid dues of loan amount. Case of the Plaintiff 2. Case of the plaintiff as per plaint and the documents filed is that it is a nationalised bank. Defendant who is proprrietor of M/s Perfect Fire Equipment approached the Paharganj Branch of the bank for availing term loan as well as working capital loan on 16.11.2019 for Rs.4 lakhs and 3 CS Comm No.1241/2023 page 1 Canara Bank Vs. Anil Sharma lakhs respectively. Upon due processing the loan was sanctioned on the same day. Due documentation was carried out. Defendant submitted a FDR of Rs.1,86,600/ as a collateral. Loan was to be repaid in 84 EMIs of Rs.6,785/ each although the plaint is silent in this regard. 3. On account of Covid related lockdown, 2 additional loans of Rs.80,000/ and Rs.12,000/ were extended to him in June 2019 and September 2020 respectively. Defendant did not adhere to financial discipline and defaulted in payment of loans. Consequently, they were declared NPA on 16.10.2022 having cumulative debit balance of Rs.9,03,795/. When the dues were not cleared despite repeated demands bank issued legal notice dated 02.01.2023 which was not replied despite due service. Plaintiff bank approached Central DLSA for PreInstitution Mediation under Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 where defendant did not partipate and NonStarter Report dated 26.04.2023 was issued. In this backdrop suit in hand was filed for followng reliefs: Prayer: i. Pass a decree for a sum of Rs.9,19,714.6/ payable by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff bank; ii. Award pendente lite and future interest @10.7%% p.a in favour of the Plaintiff Bank and against the Defendant from the date of the filing of the suit till the realization of the entire amount; iii. Award cost of the suit in favour of the plaintiff Bank and against the Defendant; iv. In case of any of further short fall in recovery of the entire decretal amount, direction may be issued to make recoveries from any other assets, movable or immovable; v. Pass such other/further order (s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendant. 4. Summons of the suit was served upon the defendant who entered appearance on 04.12.2023. Defendant's Case 5. Case of the defendant as per WS and the documents filed is that the suit in hand deserves to be dismissed since plaintiff bank has supressed material CS Comm No.1241/2023 page 2 Canara Bank Vs. Anil Sharma facts and approached this Court with unclean hands. Dismissal is also prayed on the ground that there is misjoinder of 4 different causes of action as 4 loan accounts have been clubbed together. As per defendant he could not maintain fiscal discipline on account of Covid related lockdown. In his reply on merits defendant has categorcially admitted that he availed loans of Rs. 4 lakhs and 3 lakhs respectively on 16.11.2019. He admits executing various documents qua the loan. He, however, claimed that he is educated up to 8th standard and does not understand English. The terms of the contract were not read out to him and he was asked to sign blank documents and pages. He admits submitting a fixed deposit of Rs.1,86,600/ as a collateral. 6. As regards the two additio