V.Manjula v. Syndicate Bank,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.03.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE S.VIMALA CRP (NPD) No.950 of 2016 and CMP.No.5339 of 2016 V.Manjula .. Petitioner Vs Syndicate Bank, Egmore Branch, No.16, Police Commissioner Office Road, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.
.. Respondent Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the fair order and decretal order in unnumbered E.A.SR.No.13881 of 2014 in E.P.No.3568 of 2013 in O.S.No.7731 of 2007 dated 30.10.2014 on the file of X Asst. City Civil Court, Chennai and allow this revision with costs. For Petitioner :Mr.G.Appavu
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the fair and decretal order passed by the learned X Assistant City Civil Court Court, Chennai on 30.10.2014 in unnumbered E.A.SR.No.13881 of 2014 in E.P.No.3568 of 2013 in O.S.No.7731 of 2007.
2. Originally, the suit in O.S.No.7731 of 2007 was filed by the respondent Bank as plaintiff against two defendants namely B.Christopher Vincent, who is the principal borrower of the loan and the second defendant, V.Manjula, being the guarantor for the loan agreement executed in favour of the plaintiff's Bank. 2.2. The plaintiff Bank has sanctioned a loan of Rs.2,30,000/- to the first defendant/principal borrower. A signed stamped receipt has been given to the Bank against this borrowal. 2.1. The suit was instituted by the plaintiff Bank on the ground that the first defendant/principal borrower defaulted in making the monthly repayment of loan amount and inspite of several letters and reminders sent to both the defendants, neither an attempt has been made by the first defendant to repay the loan amount nor both the defendants caused any reply. 2.2. The Court below has decreed the suit on 09.01.2013 directing the defendants to repay the loan amount with interest either jointly or severally.
3. The second defendant has filed an application in unnumbered E.A.SR.No.13881 of 2014 on the file of learned X Assistant City Civil Court, seeking to dismiss the Execution Petition filed by the plaintiff Bank, contending that the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.7731 of 2007 is illegal, null and void and inexecutable. 3.1. The contention raised by the second defendant in the petition of E.A.SR.No.13881 of 2014 is that, though the original payment was on 21.10.2004, the claim and suit should have been filed on or before 21.10.2007, but whereas the plaintiff Bank filed the plaint on 26.11.2007, i.e., after a lapse of 35 days, thereby the suit and claim are barred by law of limitation. Hence, the trial Court should have dismissed the suit on the ground that the decree is in-executable and the E.P., is not maintainable.
4. The Court below has chosen to dismiss the application in EA.SR.No.13881 of 2014 on the ground that the issue of limitation has no merits.
5. From the perusal of the pleadings, it is evident that the loan has been sanctioned by the respondent Bank on 21.10.2004 and the principal borrower has paid the last instalment on
20.12.2005 and the plaint has been filed on 26.11.2007. The second defendant has conveniently omitted to mention the last instalment was paid only in order to raise a claim of limitation for the purpose of protracting the execution proceedings. From the date of last payment, the suit filed is in time. The Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree.
6. The Executing Court has rightly rejected the application in E.A.SR.No. 13881 of 2014 on the ground that there is no merits.
7. This Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Executing Court and therefore the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
29.03.2016 ds To:
The X Assistant Court City Civil Court Chennai.
S.VIMALA,J.
ds CRP (NPD) No.950 of 2016 29.03.2016