Sat Pal ( 1 ) THIS is a suit for recover of Rs. 2,93,572. 80together with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 20% per annumfrom the date of the suit till realisation. ( 2 ) THE facts of the case briefly stated are that the plaintiff is anationalised bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisitionand Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 and having its head office atmanipal in South Kanara, District Karnataka State and having one of itsbranches at Bijwasan, New Delhi. Shri U. V. Mahaya is the Generalattorney/principal Officer/manager at Bijwasan, New Delhi branch of theplaintiff-bank. He is duly authorised to sign and velify the present plaintand to institute the present suit. In this regards he holds the power ofattorney from the plaintiff-bank. ( 3 ) AS per the averments made in the plaint defendant No. 1 whichis a partnership concern of defendants 2 and 3 were granted financial accommodation to the extent of Rs. 1. 90,000. 00 and in this connection theagreement of guarantee was executed by defendants 2 to 4 in their individualcapacity. It is further mentioned in the plaint that the defendant No. 1 wassanctioned a loan of Rs. 80,000. 00 and an over-draft limit of R. s. 70,000. 00 inall for which the defendants 2 to 4 were the guarantors. The aforesaid sumof Rs. 80,000. 00 was sanctioned to defendant No. 1 with defendants No. 2and 3 as borrowers and defendant No. 4 stood as surety/coobligant on 20thdecember, 1980 for which the defendants executed the agreements. Thesaid loan was to carry interest at the rate of 2. 85% per annum above thereserve Bank of India rate with a minimum of 11. 85% per annum and thesaid loan was repayable in monthly instalments of Rs. 2,000. 00 per month,the fust instalment being payable on or before 20/03/1981 andsubsequent instalments at the same rate on or before 20th of each subsequentenglish calendar month. Thus the loan was to be declared on or before 20/06/1984. It was further agreed that in. case of default of quarterlyinterest or instalments, the loan shall bear the over-due interest at the ratefed by the plaintiff-bank for such loan from time to time. Thus the loan was to be declared on or before 20/06/1984. It was further agreed that in. case of default of quarterlyinterest or instalments, the loan shall bear the over-due interest at the ratefed by the plaintiff-bank for such loan from time to time. ( 4 ) IT is further stated in the plaint that as agrced by the defendants,the loan was released upon the receipt of invoiecs for the purpose ofmachinery and other instruments as per details given herein below : (A) Rs. 26. 600. 00vide receipt dated 22. 12, 1980 executed by defendants 1 to 3 remitted to M/s. Machinery Marketing Associates,new Delhi. (B) Rs. 5250. 00 dated 23. 12. 1980 by defendants 1 to 3 remitted tom/s. Machinery Marketing Associates, New Delhi. (C) Rs. 7500. 00vide receipt dated 23. 12. 1980 executed by defendants 1 to 3 remitted to M/s. Machinery Marketing Associates,new Delhi. (D) Rs. 7125. 00vide receipt dated 30. 12. 1980 executed by defendants 1 to 3 remitted to M/s. Kelley s Engineering Works. (E) Rs. 9670. 00vide receipt dated 15. 1. 1981 executed by defendantsi to 3 remitted to M/s. Machinery Marketing Associates. (f ) Rs. 7490. 00 vide receipt dated 27. 1. 1981 executed by defendantsi to 3 remitted to M/s. Robit Electricals. ( 5 ) BESIDES the above mentioned amount a sum of Rs. 10,000. 00 wascredited by SODH account bearing No. SODH/39 of defendants 1 to 3 on 30/12/1980 and a further sum of Rs. 6,000. 00 to the said accounton 29/03/1981. Defendants 1 to 3 hypothecated their stocks andvarious goods and also machinery as detailed in the agreement for thisterm-loan. ( 6 ) IT is further stated in the plaint that the defendants agreed towaive the notice of variation of rate of interest and payment of overdueinterest by a letter and also gave a copy of the partnership deed. It is thenstated that a sum of Rs. 1,54,606. 00 was due to the plaintiff from the defendants on account of Loan No. OSL-26/80 as on 30/06/1980 and asumofrs. l,55,033. 00is due in this account as on the date of filing of thesuit. It is also stated that the balance outstanding amount of this loan wasacknowledged by the defendants on 17/12/1983. ( 7 ) IT is further alleged in the plaint that to avail the overdraft limitof Rs. 70. 000. l,55,033. 00is due in this account as on the date of filing of thesuit. It is also stated that the balance outstanding amount of this loan wasacknowledged by the defendants on 17/12/1983. ( 7 ) IT is further alleged in the plaint that to avail the overdraft limitof Rs. 70. 000. 00 the defendants executed various documents including pronote,agreement of hypothecation, letter of delivery of pronote, letter of deliveryof security, letter of authority and notice for variation in the rate of interestand payment of over-due interest. It is then alleged that the balance existingin this account on 22/12/1983 was to the extent of Rs. 99,884. 79and this balance amount was acknowledged by the defendants videacknowledgement of debt dated 22/12/1983. It is further statedin the plaint that a total sum of Rs. 2,93,572. 80 is due to the plaintiff-bankon account of the aforesaid accounts and the defendants have failed to paythe said amount inspite of repeated requests and demands and legal notice. Hence the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendants. ( 8 ) SUMMONS of the suit were sent to the defendants. After theservice of the summons defendant No. 2 was represented by his Counsel on 1/11/1988 but thereafter he discontinued appearing in the case. Defendant No. 4 did not appear inspite of service. Defendants 1 and 3 wereserved by publication in the daily statesman dated 4/08/1989 for 10/08/1989. But these defendants also did not appear despite service. Accordingly all the defendants were proceeded against ex parte vide orderdated 6/10/1989. On the same date the learned Counsel for theplaintiff was permitted to lead evidence by way of affidavits. Thereafter theplaintiff has filed the affidavit of Shri P. L. Tanri, Manager of Bijwasan, Newdelhi branch of the plaintiff-bank. All the averments and allegations madein the plaint have been proved by the said witness. ( 9 ) EXHIBIT P-1 is the photo copy of the power of attorney issued bythe plaintiff-bank in favour of Shri U. V. Mallaya who has signed and verifiedthe plaint in this case. Exhibits P-2 to P-5 are the documents duly signedand executed by the defendants in respect of the financial accommodationto the extent of Rs. 1,90,000. 00 granted by the plaintiff-bank in favour of thedefendant No. 1. Exhibits P-2 to P-5 are the documents duly signedand executed by the defendants in respect of the financial accommodationto the extent of Rs. 1,90,000. 00 granted by the plaintiff-bank in favour of thedefendant No. 1. Exhibits P-6 to P-11 are the receipts of the invoices for thepurchase of machinery and other instruments in respect of the loan releasedby the plaintiff-bank to the defendant No. 1. Exhibits P-12 and P-13 are thereceipts in respect of sums of Rs. 10,000. 00 and Rs. 6,000. 00 respectivelycredited to SODH Account No. 39 of defendants 1 to 3 on 30/12/1980 and 17/03/1981 respectively. Exhibits P-14 andp-15arethedocuments executed by the defendants agreeing to waive the notice ofvariation of rate of interest and payment of over-due interest. Exhibit P-16is the agreement of hypothecation duly executed by the defendants. Exhibitp-17 is the authenticated statement of account duly certified under thebankers Book Evidence Act of the Loan Account No. OSL-26/80. Exhibitp-18 is the acknowledgement of debts given by the defendants to theplaintiff-bank on 17/12/1983. Exhibits P-19 to P-25 are thedocuments including pronote, agreement of hypothecation, letter of deliveryof pronote, letter of delivery of security and notice of variation in rate ofinterest and payment of overdue interest executed by the defendants withregard to the overdraft limit of Rs. 70,000. 00. Exhibit P-26 is the authenticated copy under the Bankers Book Evidence Act of the Loan Accountno. SODH-39 of the defendants. Exhibit P-27 is the acknowledgement ofdebt by the defendants as on 22/12/1983 in respect of theaforesaid account. Exhibits P-28 and P-29 dated 24/05/1982 and 3/04/1984 are the letters sent by the defendants to the plaintiff-bankwherein they had promised to regularise their account but failed to do so. ( 10 ) ALL these exhibits have been proved by the affidavit of Shri P. L. Tanra. Manager of the plaintiff-bank. By this affidavit the said witness hasalso proved that a total sum of Rs. 2,93,572. 80 is due to the plaintiff fromthe defendants. ( 11 ) AS stated hereinabove, the defendants were proceeded againstex pane. None of the defendants has filed any written statement controverting the averments and the allegations made in the plaint. On the otherhand the plaintiff has proved its case by the affidavit of Sh. P. L. Tanri. Hence the plaintiff is entitled to succeed in the suit. Accordingly the suitfor recovery of Rs. 2,93,572. None of the defendants has filed any written statement controverting the averments and the allegations made in the plaint. On the otherhand the plaintiff has proved its case by the affidavit of Sh. P. L. Tanri. Hence the plaintiff is entitled to succeed in the suit. Accordingly the suitfor recovery of Rs. 2,93,572. 80 is hereby decreed with costs in favour of theplaintiff-bank and against the defendants. The plaintiff shall be entitledto pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 20% per annum. Decreemay be drawn accordingly. Order accordingly.