Delhi High Court
Pnb Housing Finance Ltd. vs Sunita Malhotra And Ors. on 10 April, 2013
Author: Manmohan
F-24
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(OS) 1639/2010
PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD. ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. R.K. Dhawan, Advocate with
Ms. Sheweeta Joshi, Advocate.
versus
SUNITA MALHOTRA AND ORS. ..... Defendants
Through: None.
% Date of Decision: 10th April, 2013.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
1. Present mortgage suit has been filed on 23rd July, 2010 for recovery of
Rs.22,92,580/- together with interest @ 11.5% per annum with monthly rest
till realization along with costs.
2. While the defendants No.1 and 2 are borrowers, defendant No.3 is a
guarantor in respect of a term loan of Rs.15 lacs for purchase and finishing
of second floor of property bearing No.G-2/67, Sector-16, Rohini, Delhi
having built up area of 48 sq. yds.
3. It is stated in the plaint that the present suit has been filed on failure of
the defendants to observe financial discipline and on their failure to repay
the amount despite the plaintiff's demand notice.
4. On 11th January, 2012, defendants were proceeded ex parte.
5. Subsequently, the plaintiff has filed evidence by way of an affidavit of
Mr. Pawan Sharma, its Vice President.
6. The plaintiff's witness has exhibited the term loan agreement dated
23rd September 2006 executed by defendants No.1 and 2, letter of guarantee
dated 23rd September, 2006 executed by defendant No.3 as well as letter
dated 15th November, 2006 issued by defendant No.1 confirming creation of
mortgage by deposit of original title deeds and acknowledgement of debt
dated 25th July, 2007 issued by defendants No.1 and 2 confirming the
outstanding balance of Rs.16,20,768 as on 30th June, 2007.
7. Plaintiff's witness has also exhibited the demand notice dated 21st
November, 2007 issued under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short
'Sarfaesi Act, 2002') as well as the statement of account under the banker's
books showing outstanding amount of Rs.22,92,580/- as on the date of filing
of the suit.
8. Mr. R.K. Dhawan, learned counsel for plaintiff states that despite
taking steps under the Sarfaesi Act, 2002, plaintiff has not been successful in
either selling the mortgaged property or in recovering any money.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for plaintiff and having perused the
ex parte evidence as well as the documents placed on record, this Court is of
the opinion that plaintiff has proved the facts stated in the plaint and also
exhibited the relevant documents in support of its case. Since the plaintiff's
evidence has gone unrebutted, said evidence is accepted as true and correct.
10. Consequently, present suit is decreed for a sum of Rs.22,92,580/- in
favour of the plaintiff company and jointly and severally against the
defendants along with interest @11.5% per annum with monthly rests from
the date of filing of suit till its realization and costs assessed at Rs.25,000/-.
11. A final decree is also passed entitling the plaintiff to sell the
mortgaged property i.e. second floor of property bearing No.G-2/67, Sector-
16, Rohini, Delhi having built up area of 48 sq. yds. for recovery of the
decretal amount. Registry is directed to prepare decree sheet accordingly.
MANMOHAN, J
APRIL 10, 2013
js
