(Prayer: This Civil Suit is filed under Order XXXVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 read with Order VII Rule 1 O.S., Rules, praying for a Judgment and Decree directing the first, second, third and fourth defendants to pay the plaintiff jointly and severally a sum of Rs.200/- lakhs together with interest on the principal sum of Rs.155.63 lakhs at the rate of 20% per annum till date of realisation in all a sum of Rs.355.63 lakhs and also directing the defendants to pay the costs of the suit.)1. The suit had been filed by Nabkisan Finance Limited (Formerly known as Agri Development Finance (Tamilnadu) Limited, a Non Banking Finance Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 against M/s. S&S Industries & Enterprises Ltd., the first defendant and their Vice President N.Kannan, Vice President (Operations) and V.S. Narayanan, Dirctor & Secretary and V.Santhanam, Manager (Treasury) the second to fourth defendants, seeking a Judgment and Decree against the defendants to pay to the plaintiff jointly and severally a sum of Rs.200/- lakhs together with interest on the principle sum of Rs.155.63 lakhs at the rate of 20% p.a., till the date of realisation, in all sum of Rs.355.63 lakhs and also for costs of the suit.2. The defendants had been set exparte on 10.06.2014. The said exparte order was set aside in so far as the first and third defendants were concerned by order dated 15.07.2014. However, the first and third defendants did not file the written statement. The jurisdiction of the commercial division was determined on 25.08.2020. The first and third defendants did not participate in the judicial proceedings. The plaintiff was then called upon to adduce evidence.3. The brief facts of the case are that the first defendant, on 12.05.1997 had placed before the plaintiff a proposal for funding hybrid seed development and productivity for the procurement of sunflower seeds and distribution of the same in the Districts of Tamilnadu and sought Financial Assistance of Rs.6,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only). The project report was scrutinized and financial assistance of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) was extended in the form of Inter Corporate Deposits. The amounts were also paid in installments, namely, Rs.30/- lakhs on 24.12.1997, Rs.20/- Lakhs on 27.12.1997, Rs.67/- lakhs on 12.01.1998, Rs.50/- lakhs on 04.02.1998, Rs.33/- lakhs on 13.03.1998. The first defendant had also executed promissory notes and also issued postdated cheques towards discharge of the amount borrowed.4. The promissory notes were executed on 15.04.1998 for Rs.67/- lakhs on 12.02.1998, Rs.33/- lakhs on 12.02.1998, Rs.50/- lakhs on 06.05.1998, Rs.30/- lakhs on 23.03.1998, Rs.20/- lakhs on 23.03.1998. The first defendant as stated had also issued postdated cheques. The cheques were issued dated 13.05.1998 for Rs.33/- lakhs, dated 10.06.1998 for Rs.67/- lakhs, dated 21.06.1998 for Rs.30/- lakhs, dted 24.06.1998 for Rs.20/- lakhs, dated 04.08.1998 for Rs.50/- lakhs. It has been stated that interest on the Inter Corporate Deposit of Rs.30/- lakhs was received by the plaintiff till 24.03.1998. Thereafter, the inter corporate deposits were rolled over for further period carrying interest at 20% p.a. On maturity, the interest was received through postdated cheques. The third defendant on behalf of the first defendant had written to the plaintiff on 16.05.1998 requesting further roll over of all the Inter Corporate Deposits for Rs.83/- lakhs and Rs.1.17 crores which were maturing in May and June 1988. A further letter was addressed on 12.06.1998. The plaintiff had, by letter dated 12.06.1998 did not accede to the request of the first defendant and requested immediate payment. The cheques, when presented for payment were dishonoured with the endorsement “funds insufficient”. Notices were issued and the plaintiff initiated separate proceedings under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instrument Act for prosecuting the defendants. As on the date of institution of the suit, three Calendar Cases were pending before the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Saidapet. The plaintiff then addressed letters to the defendants callling upon them to come forward to discuss and resolve the issue. A meeting was convened on 09.02.2000. The first defendant expressed inability to pay the borrowed amounts. The plaintiff filed a petition under Sections 433 & 434 of the Indian Companies Act 1956 against the first defendant in C.P.No. 185 of 2000. The defendants also wrote a letter dated 16.05.1998 acknowledging liability. It is under these circumstances that the suit had been filed. 5. As stated, the defendants did not participate in the judicial proceeding. The second and fourth defendants had been set exparte. The first and third defendants chose to abstain the judicial proceedings. They did not also file written statement.6. The plaintiff was then called upon to adduce evidence. Accordingly, Mr.D.Dhanasekar, Manager (Accounts) of the plaintiff was examined as PW-1. He marked Exs. P-1 to P-40. Ex.P-2 was letter dated 12.02.1998 sent by the second defendant to the plaintiff. Exs. P-4, P-6, P-8, P-11 & P-16 were the certified copies of the demand promissory note issues by the defendant. Exs. P-18, P-22, P-25, P-26 & P-30 were the certified true copies of the cheques issued by the defendant. The plaintiff had also filed as documents the returned memos and also the legal notices issued pursuant to the dishonour of the said cheques. Exs. P-38 & P-39 were letters sent by the defendants dated 06.04.1999 and 02.09.1999 to the plaintiff.7. A perusal of the pleadings and documents filed reveal the fact of the loan being extended to the defendants and that the loan still remain unpaid. The defendants had also acknowledged their debt.8. In
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
view of these facts, I hold that the plaintiff has made out a case for grant of a decree in accordance with the reliefs sought in the suit.9. The suit is therefore decreed with costs. Costs to be paid in accordance with the amended Section 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure.10. The Registry is delegated and directed by this Court to determine the costs and the plaintiff is permitted to file their Bill / Memo of Costs relating to expenses of witnesses; legal fees and expenses; and any other expenses incurred in connection with the legal proceedings. On the filing of the Bill/Memo of Costs, the Registry may determine the quantum of the costs.