Madras High Court
G.Natrajan vs Jayakumar Johnson on 5 January, 2022
C.S.727 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
C.S.No.727 of 2010
G.Natrajan .. Plaintiff
/versus/
1.Jayakumar Johnson
2.G.Gopalakrishnan
Representing as Power of Attorney Holder of
Jayakumar Johnson ..Defendants
Prayer: Civil Suit has been filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of the Original
Side Rules read with Order VII, Rule 1 C.P.C., praying to pass
a judgment and decree against the defendants and in favour of the
plaintiff :
(a) To direct the defendants to pay the plaintiff a sum of
Rs.1,91,07,000/- interest at 24% p.a on Rs.49,50,000/- from the
date of plaint till the date of realization within a date fixed by this
Hon'ble Court in respect of the Mortgage amount.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
(b) In default order for the sale of the Mortgage property [More fully
described in the schedule] and to adjust the same after defraying
the expenses of the sale towards the amount due under the decree
(c) In case of deficiency pass a personal decree against the defendant
for the short fall
(d) Pay the cost of this suit
(e) Pass such further or other order, as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render
justice.
For Plaintiff : Mr.K.P.Sanjeev Kumar
------
JUDGMENT
(The case has been heard through Video Conferencing)
The suit is for recovery of mortgage money. The plaintiff has laid a suit
for recovery of sum of Rs.49,50,000/- along with past interest at 24% per
annum cumulatively a sum of Rs.1,91,07,000/- with future interest at the
same rate.
2.According to the plaintiff, between 06.11.1997 to 30.03.1998 he had
advanced various amounts totalling Rs.49.50 lakhs on nine different
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
occasions. Of them, on five occasions, the amounts were lent through
cheques drawn either on his banker M/s.Indian Overseas Bank or his
Banker M/s.Standard Chartered Bank. On 18.06.1998, the entire
transactions were acknowledged by the defendants in his communication
addressed to the plaintiff. Subsequently on 18.06.1998, he executed a
promissory note for a sum of Rs.49.50 lakhs payable with interest at 24%
per annum. Subsequently, to secure the debt, the defendants created an
equitable mortgage, vide a letter of deposit of title deed dated
22.07.1998. The title deed itself is dated 16.07.1979. As the defendants
did not repay the loan amount despite a legal notice issued on him dated
04.05.2010, the suit is laid.
3.The defendants remained ex parte. The plaintiff examined himself as
P.W.1 and produced 12 documents and they were marked as Ex.P1 to
Ex.P12. Of them, Ex.P.1 is a title deed over which an equitable mortgage
is created vide Ex.P3, letter of deposit of title deed dated 22.07.1998. The
promissory note referred to above was marked as Ex.P10 and letter of the
defendants dated 18.06.1998 is marked as Ex.P11. The Bank statements
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
which show the payment of five amounts is marked as Ex.P12 series.
4.This Court perused the plaint and perused Ex.P11/communication from
the defendants to the plaintiff, wherein the plaintiff has paid various
amounts totalling Rs.49,50,000/- and the details are extracted hereunder :
Sl.No. Date Mode of Payment Amount
1. 06.11.1997 Cash 1,50,000
2. 10.11.1997 Cheque drawn on IOB 2,20,000
3. 28.11.1997 Cheque drawn on Standard 5,00,000
Chartered Bank
4. 23.12.1997 Cash 16,30,000
5. 26.12.1997 Cheque drawn on IOB 7,50,000
6. 26.12.1997 Cheque drawn on Standard 5,00,000
Chartered Bank
7. 26.12.1997 Cheque drawn on Standard 5,00,000
Chartered Bank
8. 17.01.1998 Cash 2,00,000
9. 30.03.1998 Cash 5,00,000
5.This Court also verified five transactions made through the Banks in
Ex.P12/statement of accounts. In the Bank Statements in Ex.P12 reflects
the Bank transactions as stated in Ex.P11.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
6. This Court holds that the plaintiff has established his entitlement to
receive the suit claim as prayed for.
7. The suit is decreed with cost and the defendants are directed to pay
the sum of Rs.1,91,07,000/-, which is made to the principal sum of
Rs.49,50,000/- with accrued past interest of Rs.1,41,57,000/-
calculated on the principal sum at 24% per annum, as well as future
interest from the date of the suit on the principal sum at the said rate of
24% per annum.
05.01.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking / Non speaking order
ms
To
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
APPENDIX
I. Witnesses :
Plaintiffs :
PW1 Mt.G.Nagarajan (plaintiff )
II. Exhibits :
For Plaintiffs :
Exhibits Description Dated
Ex.P1 Sale Deed between the 1st Defendant and his 16.07.1979
Vendor
Ex.P2 Power of Attorney between the 1st Defendant 06.11.1997
and the 2nd Defendant
Ex.P3 Letter of Deposit of Title between Plaintiff and 22.07.1998
the 1st Defendant
Ex.P4 Plaint copy in O.S.No.2247 of 2006 between 24.02.2006
the Plaintiff and Defendant
Ex.P5 Judgment in O.S.No.2247 of 2006 30.03.2007
Ex.P6 Decree in O.S.No.2247 of 2006 30.03.2007
st
Ex.P7 Legal notice between the Plaintiff and the 1 04.05.2010
Defendant
Ex.P8 Acknowledgment card for Defendant 1 07.05.2010
Ex.P9 Encumbrance Certificate from 01.01.1998 to
22.07.2010
Ex.P10 The original Promissory Note drawn by the 2nd 18.06.1998
Defendant on behalf of the 1st defendant
Ex.P11 The original Letter issued by the 2nd Defendant 18.06.1998
to the Plaintiff
Ex.P12 The photocopy of the Bank accounts statement
of the Plaintiff for the period 1997 to 1998
05.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.727 of 2010
N.SESHASAYEE, J.,
ms
C.S.No.727 of 2010
05.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
