Bangalore District Court Vijaya Bank vs Smt.Savithri M on 1 April, 2016 sIN THE COURT OF THE XII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE PRESENT: SRI.BHAIRAPPA SHIVALING NAIK B.Com.,LL.B.(Spl), XII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH.No.27), BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2016 O.S.No.3890/2014 PLAINTIFF: Vijaya Bank Byatarayanapura Branch, Bellary road, Bengaluru 560 092. Represented by its Principal Officer and Chief Manager Sri.V.Mukund Son of Sri.Madhava Rao (By Sri.V.Ananda Setty Advocate) VS DEFENDANTS: Smt.Savithri M Aged about 36 years, Wife of Sri.N.H.Mallesh, Prop:M/s.Raghavendra Enterprises No.47/2, 'Bhava Tharini' Near Tata Circle, Sriramapur main road, Amruthahalli, 2 O.S.No.3890/2014 Sahakaranagar post, Bengaluru 560092. (Deft. By Sri.Venugopala Advocate) Date of Institution of the suit : 29.04.2014 Nature of the suit : Recovery of Money Date of commencement of recording of the evidence : 10.12.2014 Date on which the Judgment was pronounced : 01.04.2016 Total Duration Years Months Days : 01 11 03 (BHAIRAPPA SHIVALING NAIK) XII ADDL. CC AND SS JUDGE BANGALORE JUDGMENT This is a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of money against the defendant. 2. The plaintiff is a Nationalised Bank and represented by its Principal Officer and Chief Manager. The defendant availed loan/cash credit facility of Rs.5,00,000/ on 9.11.2012 from the plaintiff Bank for her business purpose, particularly for Soap oil, phenyl business. The defendant has executed Demand Promissory Note and 3 O.S.No.3890/2014 Loan/Articles of Agreement for Rs.5,00,000/ in favour of plaintiff, unconditionally agreeing to pay the amount due on demand together with interest at 12.25% p.a. compounded monthly. 3. The defendant has failed to repay the loan amount and the interest due as agreed inspite of demand. There is no chance of the defendant discharging her liability outside the court. Hence the plaintiff has constrained to file the suit to recover Rs.5,43,272/ including the interest upto date with future interest thereon at the rate of 14.30% compounded monthly from the date of suit, to the date of realisation. 4. The defendant has appeared through her counsel and resisted the claim of the plaintiff by filing her written statement. The defendant has denied all the allegations and assertions made in the plaint as false. The defendant has disputed the loan transaction and also denied the execution of documents for having availed loan from the plaintiff Bank. The defendant has submitted that the plaintiff has filed a false and frivolous suit against the defendant to grab money arbitrarily. The defendant has undergone 4 O.S.No.3890/2014 training in ESPD on Food Processing conducted by the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Institute (in short 'MSMEDI', Bengaluru) under the organisation of the Govt. of India. That 'MSMEDI' has also issued a Certificate in this regard to the defendant after successful completion of the training on 18.10.2010. There is a scheme to avail the loan for running of the 'MSMEDI' to encourage the persons interested in such activities of manufacturing. All the banks have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with a Small and Medium Rating Agency (SMERA), CRISIL and ICRA to enable financial assistance to the trained persons under the 'MSMEDI' scheme. The defendant has also undergone training in the said institution and the defendant is also liable to get a loan facility under the said scheme. After getting training, the defendant has approached the plaintiff Bank and produced the Certificate issued by the 'MSMEDI' and availed loan of