C. M. Nayar, J. (Oral) ( 1 ) THE plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,94,274. 18 with costs and interest pendente lite and future at 16. 5% per annum. ( 2 ) THE plaintiff is a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 (Act 5 of 1970) having its Head Office at 16, Old Court House Street, Calcutta-700 001 and having, inter alia, its Branch Office at Lajpat Nagar situated in the DDA Office-cum-Shopping Complex, Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024. Shri S. K. Chatterjee is the Principal Officer and duly constituted Attorney of the plaintiff and at the relevant time was the Deputy Manager at Lajpat Nagar Branch and is fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case and is authorised to institute suits, sign and verify the plaint, swear affidavits, and generally to do all acts and things on behalf of the plaintiff Bank. ( 3 ) DEFENDANT No. 1 is a duly registered partnership firm of which defendants 2 to 5 are the partners and they are carrying on business at K-2, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market Complex (Near Taj Hotel) New Delhi- 110 003. Defendants No. 6 to 8 are carrying on business and personally working for gain. ( 4 ) IT is alleged that by an application in writing dated 2. 4. 1980 defendant No. 1 through its Partners had applied to the plaintiff Bank for financial assistance by way of a Loan of Rs. 1,08,000. 00p. for purchasing three new Ambassador cars to be used as DLY Private Taxis. On May 7, 1980 the plaintiff Bank had sanctioned a Term Loan of Rs. 1,08,000. 00 to defendants No. 1 to 5 in the name of their Partnership firm i. e. defendant No. 1 herein at a margin of 30% and at an interest rate of 2% OBR Minimum 11% per annum with quarterly rests. The terms and conditions of the aforesaid sanction, inter alia, were as under : SECURITY : Primary : Hypothecation of three new Ambassador Mark 4 cars valued at Rs. 1,55,523. 00 p. with all accessories. Additional : (i) Personal guarantee of all the partners. (ii) Hypothecation of one Ambassador car No. DHE 1911 Valued at Rs. 38,000. The terms and conditions of the aforesaid sanction, inter alia, were as under : SECURITY : Primary : Hypothecation of three new Ambassador Mark 4 cars valued at Rs. 1,55,523. 00 p. with all accessories. Additional : (i) Personal guarantee of all the partners. (ii) Hypothecation of one Ambassador car No. DHE 1911 Valued at Rs. 38,000. 00 p. (iii) Personal guarantee of Shri A. C. Banerjee, Shri Om Prakash Julka and Shri Kabul Singh. (iv) Assignment of Life Policy for face value of Rs. 25,000. 00p. in the name of Shri G. S. Dhillon. Repayment : In 36 equal monthly instalments along with interest commencing from 30th day after disbursement is made. ( 5 ) DEFENDANTS No. 1 to 5 as the Borrowers/principal debtors had accepted the aforesaid terms and conditions of the loan of Rs. 1,08,000. 00p. and in consideration of the said Term Loan of Rs. 1,08,000. 00p. executed and delivered to the plaintiff their security documents thereby promising and securing the due and proper repayment of the said loan amount with interest as per the agreed terms. The said loan amount of Rs. 1,08,000. 00 p. was disbursed and paid to the defendants No. 1 to 5 and with the said financial assistance as received from the plaintiff Bank the Defendants 1 to 5 had purchased three new Ambassador cars which were registered as DLY Private Taxis with the State Transport Authority, Delhi bearing No. DLY 840, DLY-841 and DLY 842. The said three vehicles as also the vehicle No. DHE-1911 had been hypothecated by defendants 1 to 5 as primary security and additional security as against the aforesaid loan as per the terms of the sanction. ( 6 ) IT is further alleged that defendants No. 6 and 7 and one Shri Kabul Singh stood as guarantors for defendants No. 1 to 5 and they had in consideration of the aforesaid loan of Rs. 1,08,000. 00p. executed and delivered to the plaintiff Bank their personal continuing guarantees dated 9. 5. 1980 thereby guaranteeing and securing to the plaintiff Bank the due and proper repayment of the said loan amount with interest. 1,08,000. 00p. executed and delivered to the plaintiff Bank their personal continuing guarantees dated 9. 5. 1980 thereby guaranteeing and securing to the plaintiff Bank the due and proper repayment of the said loan amount with interest. ( 7 ) IN June, 1982 the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the Borrowers/principal debtors with the consent and knowledge of defendant No. 6 and 7 as guarantors had approached the plaintiff bank with the request for the grant of an additional loan by way of an enhanced limit for purchasing three more new Ambassador cars for being used as DLY Private Taxis. Upon the aforesaid request made by defendants No. 1 to 5 for the additional loan, the plaintiff bank had on 22. 7. 1982 sanctioned an enhanced modified credit loan of Rs. 2,05,000. 00p. as an over all limit with the following sub-limits,namely :- (I) Cash Credit : Rs. 15,000. 00p. Security : Hypothecation of Book debts of M/s. Krishak Bharti Cooperative Ltd. , Bharat Steel Tubes Ltd. Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. , Dabur and other first class parties not older than 60 days. Margin : 50% Interest : 6% OBR Minimum 15% per annum with quarterly rests. (II) Term Loan I : Rs. 40,000. 00p. (run down balance) Security : Hypothecation of three DLY Cars purchased from the financial assistance in 1980 valued at Rs. 1,55,520. 00p. Repayment : Rs. 3,000. 00p. per month plus interest till liquidation. (III) Term Loan II: Rs. 1,50,000. 00p. Security : Hypothecation of three DLY cars to be purchased from the financial assistance valued at Rs. 2. 02 lacs. Margin : 25% Interest : 6% OBR Minimum 15% p. a. with quarterly rests. Repayment : Rs. 5,500. 00p. per month plus interest till liquidated, maximum 36 months Additional securities : 1. Personal guarantee of all the partners 2. Personal guarantee of Shri A. C. Banerjee, Shri Kabul Singh and Shri O. P. Julka. 3. Assignment of FDR s for Rs. 30,000p. in favour of the Bank including the existing FDR for Rs. 10,000. 00p. 4. Hypothecation of the entire fleet of cars duly recorded with RTA 5. Assignment of LIC policy in the name of Shri G. S. Dhillon face value of Rs. 25,000. 00p. ( 8 ) FURTHER facts are stated in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 which may be reproduced as under: "11. 10,000. 00p. 4. Hypothecation of the entire fleet of cars duly recorded with RTA 5. Assignment of LIC policy in the name of Shri G. S. Dhillon face value of Rs. 25,000. 00p. ( 8 ) FURTHER facts are stated in paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 which may be reproduced as under: "11. DEFENDANTS No. 1 to 5 as borrowers/principal debtors had accepted the aforesaid terms of the enhanced modified credit loan and had received, utilised and enjoyed the aforesaid modified over-all limit of Rs. 2. 05 lakhs and had purchased with the said financial assistance of the plaintiff Bank three more new Ambassador cars which was registered as DLY Taxi s with State Transport Authority, Delhi bearing Nos. DLY-131, DLY-136 and DLY 137 which were also hypothecated with the plaintiff bank as primary security against the aforesaid loan in addition to the vehicles already hypothecated as stated in paragraph 7 stated hereinabove. 12. That in consideration of the aforesaid modified over-all limit of Rs. 2. 05 lakhs, the defendant No. 1 to 5 as borrowers/principal debtors had executed in favour of the plaintiff bank and delivered to the plaintiff bank their security documents, namely : Demand Promissory Note for Rs. 2. 05 lakhs dated 24. 7. 1982 bearing interest at 15% per annum with quarterly rests, deed of hypothecation of transport equipment dated 24. 7. 1982 thereby hypothecating with the plaintiff Bank the motor vehicles bearing Nos. DLY-840, DLY-841, DLY-131, DLY-136, DLY-137 and motor car bearing No. DHE-1911, deed of hypothecation of debts and movable assets dated 24. 7. 1982. 13. That in consideration of the aforesaid over-all limit of Rs. 2. 05 lakhs, the defendants No. 2 to 5 had also stood guarantors in their individual capacities and had executed in favour of the plaintiff bank and delivered to the plaintiff bank their joint and several personal continuing guarantee dated 24. 7. 1982. That defendants No. 6 and 7 had also stood guarantors for the above named borrowers/principal debtors for the above-said over-all limit of Rs. 2. 05 lakhs which had been granted by the plaintiff Bank and had executed in favour of the plaintiff Bank and delivered to the plaintiff bank their personal continuing guarantee dated 24. 7. 1982 thereby guaranteeing and securing the due and proper repayment of the aforesaid over-all limit of Rs. 2. 2. 05 lakhs which had been granted by the plaintiff Bank and had executed in favour of the plaintiff Bank and delivered to the plaintiff bank their personal continuing guarantee dated 24. 7. 1982 thereby guaranteeing and securing the due and proper repayment of the aforesaid over-all limit of Rs. 2. 05 lakhs with interest at 15% per annum or at such other banks rate or rates of interest as may be prevailing from time to time immediately on demand. ( 9 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 with the knowledge and consent of defendant No. 6 and 7 as guarantors had once again approached the plaintiff bank for the grant of an additional loan for the purpose of purchasing three more new Ambassador Cars for being run as DLY Taxis and upon the said request the plaintiff bank had on 9. 11. 1983 sanctioned an over-all limit of Rs. 3,98,000. 00 with the following sub-limits, inter alia, on the following terms and conditions. I) Cash Credit Limit Rs. 90,000. 00 cum over-draft. ( 10 ) SECURITY Hypothecation of Book-debts of Govt. Deptts and undertakings - Director General, Door Darshan, Rajasthan Information Centre National Seeds Corporation, IFFCO, Krishak Bharti, Co-operative and NAFED and Ist class Pvt. parties to be confirmed by branch office and obtaining report from party s bankers. Margin : 40% Interest 6. 5% OBR Min. 16. 5% P. A. with quarterly rests. II) Term Loan-I Rs. 8,000. 00 (run down balance ). Security Hypothecation of 3 DLY Cars. Repayment To be liquidated in full within November 83 ). Interest 5% OBR Min. 15% p. a. with quarterly rests. III) Term Loan II Rs. 1. 40 lacs (rundown balance) Security Hypothecation of 3 DLY Cars. Interest 5% OBR Min. 15% p. a. with quarterly rests. Repayment 1. 25,000. 00 in November, 1983. 2. Rs. 25,000. 00 in December,83 and quarterly interest. 3. Balance in monthly instalments of Rs. 4,000. 00 p. m. plus interest on quarterly basis. IV) Term Loan III Rs. 1. 60 lacs Security Hypothecation of 3 new Ambassador Cars costing Rs. 2. 25 lacs to be run as DLY Taxis. Margin 30%. Interest 5% OBR Min. 15% p. a. with quarterly rests. Repayment 1. Rs. 4,500. 00 per month plus interest commencing Jan,1984 in 36 months. 2. Balance in 37th month. ADDITIONAL SECURITY : 1. Personal Guarantee of all the partners. 2. 2. 25 lacs to be run as DLY Taxis. Margin 30%. Interest 5% OBR Min. 15% p. a. with quarterly rests. Repayment 1. Rs. 4,500. 00 per month plus interest commencing Jan,1984 in 36 months. 2. Balance in 37th month. ADDITIONAL SECURITY : 1. Personal Guarantee of all the partners. 2. Assignment of FDR for Rs. 20,000. 00 in the name of Smt. Pritam Kaur Dhillon and Rs. 10,000 in the name of Sr. G. S. Dhillon and further Rs. 10,000 in the name of the partner to be brought within 31. 12. 1983. 3. Personal guarantee of Sr. A. C. Banerjee, Ex-Secy. , Min. of Commerce. 4. Personal guarantee of Sr. O. P. Julka net worth Rs. 1. 00 lac approx. 5. Personal guarantee of Sri Kabul Singh worth Rs. 1. 50 lacs. 6. Assignment of three LIC Policies of face value Rs. 0. 25 lacs each in the name of Sr. G. S. Dhillon, Mrs. Varinder Pal Dhillon and Jagjit Singh Dhillon. IN case the policies are under Money Back Scheme, the instalments receivable from LIC to be deposited with Bank in FDR duly assigned in favour of the Bank. 7. Hypothecation charge on DLY 840, Dly 841, DLY 842 DLY 131, DLY 136, DLY 137, DHE 1911 and 3 new Ambassador Cars to be purchased for the entire credit line. ( 11 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 as borrowers/principal debtors have received, availed and enjoyed the aforesaid fresh over-all limit of Rs. 3. 98 lakhs on 12. 4. 1984 and in consideration of the aforesaid over-all limit of Rs. 3. 98 lakhs defendants No. 1 to 5 jointly and severally as borrowers/principal debtors have executed in favour of the plaintiff Bank and delivered to the plaintiff Bank their following security documents, thereby promising and securing the due and proper repayment of the said over-all limit together with interest namely :- A) Demand promissory note for Rs. 3. 98 lakhs dated 12. 4. 1984 bearing interest at 16. 5% per annum with quarterly rests; B) Letter of continuity dated 12. 4. 1984; C) Deed of hypothecation of debts and movable assets dated 12. 4. 1984; D) Deed of hypothecation of transport equipment dated 12. 4. 1984 thereby hypothecating with the plaintiff Bank vehicles bearing No. DLY-131, DLY 136, DLY 137 DLY 840 DLY 841, DLY 842, DET 8608, DET 8609 DET 8629 and DHE 1911. 4. 1984; C) Deed of hypothecation of debts and movable assets dated 12. 4. 1984; D) Deed of hypothecation of transport equipment dated 12. 4. 1984 thereby hypothecating with the plaintiff Bank vehicles bearing No. DLY-131, DLY 136, DLY 137 DLY 840 DLY 841, DLY 842, DET 8608, DET 8609 DET 8629 and DHE 1911. ( 12 ) THE amounts due and outstanding in the various sub-limits as on the date of filing the suit inclusive of interest totalling to the over-all outstanding of Rs. 4,94,274. 18 is detailed as under: A. Term Loan Account No. 51/82 Rs. 1,53,282. 99 b. Term Loan Account No. 17/84 Rs. 2,16,400. 11 c. Cash Credit cum Overdraft Account Rs. 1,24,591. 08 Total Rs. 4,94,274. 18 ( 13 ) THE facts regarding accruing of cause of action are stated in paragraph 26 of the plaint which read as below: " The cause of action first arose on 7. 5. 1980 when the term loan of Rs. 1. 08 lacs was granted to defendants No. 1 to 5 and in consideration whereof the said defendants as the Borrowers/principal Debtors had executed their security documents in acknowledgement of the said debt and the defendants No. 6 to 7 had executed their personal continuing guarantees dated 9. 5. 1980 in consideration of the said debt. The cause of action further arose on 22. 7. 1982 when the enhanced modified credit loan of Rs. 2. 05 lacs was sanctioned to defendants No. 1 to 5 and in consideration whereof the defendants No. 1 to 5 as borrowers/principal debtors had executed their security documents dated 24. 7. 1982 and defendants No. 6 and 7 hadexecuted their singular continuing guarantees dated 24. 7. 1982 in consideration of the said enhanced modified limit of Rs. 2. 05 lacs. The cause of action further arose on 9. 11. 1983 when an enhanced over-all limit of Rs. 3. 98 lacs was sanctioned by the plaintiff Bank at the request of the defendants herein. The cause of action further arose on 11/4/1984 when the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the borrowers/principal debtors had executed their balance confirmation letters dated 11. 4. 1984 admitting, acknowledging and confirming their indebtedness and the balance outstanding and payable to the plaintiff Bank. The cause of action further arose on 12. 4. The cause of action further arose on 11/4/1984 when the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the borrowers/principal debtors had executed their balance confirmation letters dated 11. 4. 1984 admitting, acknowledging and confirming their indebtedness and the balance outstanding and payable to the plaintiff Bank. The cause of action further arose on 12. 4. 1984 when the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the Borrowers/principal debtors had availed of the aforesaid sanctioned over-all limit of Rs. 3. 98 lacs and had received and enjoyed the said amount and in consideration whereof they had executed their security documents dated 12. 4. 1984 and the defendants No. 6 to 8 had executed their personal continuing guarantees dated 12. 4. 1984 in consideration of the said over-all limit of Rs. 3. 98 lacs granted to defendants No. 1 to 5. The cause of action further arose from month to month and on various dates when the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the Borrowers/principal debtors had failed and neglected to make the repayments against the advances and towards the interest as per the terms of the sanction and agreed to by the defendants No. 1 to 5 and they thereby having committed a default and an infringement and breach in the said agreed terms of the loan. The cause of action also arose on thee date when the defendants No. 1 to 5 as the Borrowers/principal debtors had made small deposit towards part liquidation of their debt and had failed and neglected to make any further payments to liquidate their debt inspite of their promise to do so. The cause of action also arose on the date when the defendants No. 1 to 5 had written their letters to the plaintiff Bank admitting and acknowledging their debt in writing. The cause of action finally arose seven days after service of the demand notice dated 12. 5. 1986 when the defendants failed and neglected to repay the amounts as demanded within the time allowed. The cause of action is a continuing one. " ( 14 ) SUMMONS in the suit were issued to the defendants and they were duly served. Defendants 1 to 5 filed their written statements thereby controverting the allegations made in the plaint. Replication was filed by the plaintiff to the written statements of defendants 1 to 5 thereby reiterating the averments as made in the plaint. " ( 14 ) SUMMONS in the suit were issued to the defendants and they were duly served. Defendants 1 to 5 filed their written statements thereby controverting the allegations made in the plaint. Replication was filed by the plaintiff to the written statements of defendants 1 to 5 thereby reiterating the averments as made in the plaint. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed on May 7, 1990: 1. Whether the plaint has been verified and signed and the suit filed by an authorised person? OPP 2. Whether blank papers were got signed by the plaintiff from the defendants? If so, what is its effect? OPD 3. Whether fresh loan had been sanctioned and given by the plaintiff to the defendants after the defendants had paid the earlier loan? OPD 4. Whether the plaintiff had given no-objection for registration of the vehicles and permission for the conversion of the said vehicles as private Cars without recovering the whole of the amount due from the defendants to the plaintiff? OPD 5. What the amount, if any, is payable by the defendants to the plaintiff? OPP 6. What is the amount of interest, if any, payable by the defendants to the plaintiff? OPP 7. Whether the defendants made payments to the plaintiff as alleged in para 24? OPD 8. Relief. ( 15 ) VIDE order dated November 8, 1995 the defendants were proceeded against ex parte. Issue No. 1 ( 16 ) THE Power of Attorney in favour of Mr. S. K. Chatterjee who signed and verified the plaint is annexed as Exhibit P. 1 and he has also appeared as a witness to reiterate the averments made in the plaint. There is no evidence to rebut the same. It is held that the suit has been instituted and plaint is signed and verified by a duly authorised person. This issue is, accordingly, decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. Issue Nos. 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 ( 17 ) THE defendants have not led any evidence to show that they did not avail of the loan facilities against pledge of cars and on the contrary executed various documents as referred to in the plaint. To prove its claim the plaintiff examined Mr. S. K. Chatterjee, Manager as Public Witness 1 and Mr. 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 ( 17 ) THE defendants have not led any evidence to show that they did not avail of the loan facilities against pledge of cars and on the contrary executed various documents as referred to in the plaint. To prove its claim the plaintiff examined Mr. S. K. Chatterjee, Manager as Public Witness 1 and Mr. Subhash Chander Rastogi, Manager of the plaintiff Bank posted at Safdarjung Development Area Branch as Public Witness 2. Exhibit P-15 is the loan application dated April 2, 1980 duly signed by defendants 3,4 and 5. Exhibit P-16 is the Pronote dated May 9, 1980 for a sum of Rs. 1,08,000. 00 signed by Balbir Singh, G. S. Dhillon, Pritam Kaur and Jagjit Singh. Exhibit P-17 is the Deed of Hypothecation. Exhibits P-18 to P-22 are the Letters of Guarantee. G. S. Dhillon defendant No. 3 pledged his LIC policy and the same was assigned in favour of the plaintiff vide letter of assignment Exhibit P-23. Balance Confirmation Letter Exhibit P-24 dated July 1, 1981 was written by defendant No. 3. Exhibit P-25 is the Balance Confirmation Letter duly signed by defendants 3 and 4. ( 18 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 had applied for additional loan on which an enhanced modified credit loan of Rs. 2,05,000. 00 as an overall limit was sanctioned as per the following break-up as stated in the statement of Public Witness 2: "i) Cash Credit: Rs. 15,000. 00 II) Term Loan I: Rs. 40,000. 00 (Run down balance) III) Term Loan II:rs. 1,50,000. 00 ( 19 ) WITH regard to the above loan of Rs. 2,05,000. 00 the following documents were proved by the plaintiff: I) Pronote dated July 24, 1982 for a sum of Rs. 2,05,000. 00 Exhibit P-26 executed by defendants 2,3,4 and 5; II) Deed of Hypothecation of transportation, Deed of Hypothecation of Debts and movable assets and Letter of Guarantee signed by defendants 2,3,4 and 5 are exhibits P. 27, P. 28 and P. 29 respectively. III) Letter of Guarantee signed by defendants 2 to 5 is Exhibit P-30. Defendants 1 to 5 were sanctioned an overall limit of Rs. 3. 95 lakhs as proved by the statement of Public Witness 2 with the following break up: a) Cash Credit cum Overdraft Rs. 90,000. 00b) Term Loan (I) (Run down Rs. 8,000. 00 balance)c) Term Loan (II) Rs. 1,40,000. Defendants 1 to 5 were sanctioned an overall limit of Rs. 3. 95 lakhs as proved by the statement of Public Witness 2 with the following break up: a) Cash Credit cum Overdraft Rs. 90,000. 00b) Term Loan (I) (Run down Rs. 8,000. 00 balance)c) Term Loan (II) Rs. 1,40,000. 00 (Run down balance)d) Term Loan (III) Rs. 1,60,000. 060( 20 ) WITH regard to the loan certain documents were executed in the presence of Public Witness 2. Exhibit P-31 is the Pronote dated April 12, 1984 for a sum of Rs. 3,98,000. 00 duly signed by defendants 2,3,4 and 5. Letter of Continuity is Ex. P-30a. Deeds of Hypothecation are Exhibits P-32 and P-33 and letter of guarantee is Exhibit P-34. All these documents are duly signed by Balbir Singh, G. S. Dhillon, Pritam Kaur and Jagjit Singh. Besides these documents defendant Nos. 6,7 and 8 had executed Letters of guarantee Exhibits P-35, P-36 and P-37 duly signed by them. Exhibits P-38 and P-39 are the letters dated April 28, 1984 and May 17, 1986 respectively. Exhibit P-2 is the copy of the notice dated May 12, 1986 sent to the defendants by the plaintiff Bank through their Advocate thereby demanding the repayment of the loan amount. Exhibits P-3 to P-10 are the postal receipts. The notice was also sent through UPC and the certificate of posting is Exhibit P-11. The statements of Account duly certified under the Bankers Book Evidence Act are Exhibits P-12 to P-14. ( 21 ) THE plaintiff examined Public Witness 1 Mr. S. K. Chatterjee, Manager and Public Witness 2 Mr. Subhash Chander Rastogi, Public Witness 2. In his statement Public Witness 2 Mr. Subhash Chander Rastogi, Manager of the plaintiff Bank has stated that all the documents pertaining to loan transactions were duly filled in before their execution and had been examined by the defendants. All the documents were completed in all respect before they were executed and the defendants signed these documents before him. Public Witness 2 has further stated in his statement that the defendants had availed of the facilities but had not made the payments due from them and that the suit amount is due from the defendants. All the documents were completed in all respect before they were executed and the defendants signed these documents before him. Public Witness 2 has further stated in his statement that the defendants had availed of the facilities but had not made the payments due from them and that the suit amount is due from the defendants. The perusal of the documents placed on record as well as the evidence produced by the plaintiff leave no manner of doubt that the loan facilities were enjoyed by defendants 1 to 5 and defendants 6 to 8 stood Guarantors for the due payment of the loan and, as such, the defendants are liable to pay the amount as claimed in the suit. ( 22 ) I have heard learned counsel for the plaintiff and also perused the evidence as well as documents on record. The defendants have neither appeared in Court nor put forward their defence to repudiate the claim of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has proved the claim in suit and the same is supported by evidence of Public Witness 1 and Public Witness 2 and the documents on record. ( 23 ) ACCORDINGLY, I pass a decree in the sum of Rs. 4,94,274. 18 with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The plaintiff shall also be entitled to pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of institution of the suit till realisation.