1. This summary suit has been filed by the plaintiff under Order 37 of the CPC on the basis of a promissory note dated 4.8.94 executed by the defendant. During the pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff expired on 14.6.99 and his widow Smt. Roma Punia, who was the only legal heir, has been brought on record.
2. The original promissory note dated 4.8.94 has been duly brought on record.
3. The brief background of the case to the extent relevant for the purposes of the present judgment are briefly capsulated parawise hereinbelow:-
4. The original plaintiff was in the Government employment and retired as Joint Secretary from the Ministry of External Affairs on 31.3.94. His last posting was in the consulate of India at New York.
5. The case of the plaintiff is that, at a farewell party organized immediately after his retirement sometime in the month of April 1994, the defendant happened to meet the plaintiff, and during the meeting discussions took place about certain investment proposals.
6. Thereafter it is averred that on the assurances held out by the defendant, the plaintiff advanced a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- to the defendant as per details mentioned below:-
(a). By cheque No. 679431 and 679433 both dated 25.7.1994 totalling Rs. 3,40,000/- (i.e. Rs. 2,50,000/- and Rs. 90,000/- respectively) in the name of defendant's company Japji Food Ltd.;
(b). By cheque No. 679432 dated 25.7.1994 for Rs. 1,60,000/- in the name of defendant's company J.G. Pharmaceuticals;
AND
(c). By cheque No. 679434 dated 3.8.1994 for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- in the name of defendant's company Japji Foods Ltd.
All abovementioned cheques being drawn on ANZ Grindlays Bank, 10, Sansad Marg, New Delhi.
The categorical case of the plaintiff is that above cheques were all duly encashed upon presentation and that for repayment of amounts thereof, the defendant executed a promissory note dated 4.8.94 for Rs. 7,50,000/- promising to pay back the amount on demand Along with the interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f 4.8.94.
8. On 18.8.94, the plaintiff demanded payment and thereupon defendant returned an amount of Rs. 30,000/-, by way of a cheque from his Company M/s. Japji Foods Ltd. and but thereafter did not pay any there amount.
When the defendant did not pay, despite plaintiff's repeated requests, he (plaintiff) filed the present summary suit for Rs. 8,27,019/- plus interest pendente lite and future @ 18%.
9. The application filed by the defendant seeking leave to contest, was dismissed in default on 9.7.2002.
10. In terms of Order 37, Rule 3(6)(a) of CPC, the effect of dismissal of the application for leave to contest, would be the same as if no application had at all been made.
11. Moreover I find that the plaintiff by the averments made in the plaint, which are all duly verified, has established the loan and laos the due execution of promissory note in his favor. Plaintiff also established the amount due there under after adjusting the payment of Rs. 30,000/- which had been paid on 18.8.1994.
12. The plaintiff had also served legal notice upon the defendant by registered post on 9.5.1995, carbon copy of which has also been placed on record, which also stands as un-rebutted.
13. In view of the said un-rebutted averments of the plaintiff, and since the suit in question clearly falls in the category of summary suit covered under Order xxxvII of CPC, and furthermore since the application for leave to contest has been dismissed on 9.7.2002, as such the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of the suit amount being Rs. 8,27,019/- Along with the pendente lite and future interest also @ 18% considering that the said rate is the agreed rate of interest mentioned in the promissory note executed by the defendant in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff will be entitled to his costs. The suit is accordingly decreed with costs and interest pendente lite and future at 18% p.a.
Comments