Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Vimal Febrics

Bombay HC2 Sept 2009SS/2214/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a civil suit for recovery of Rs. 6,72,847/- arising from dishonored bills of exchange drawn by a constituent of the plaintiff bank and accepted by the defendant. The defendant failed to appear, and the claim was proved via affidavit evidence. The suit was decreed with the modification of awarding interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing.

What did the court decide?

Decree for recovery of principal amount of Rs. 6,72,847/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing the suit until realization.

Union Bank of India Vs Vimal Febrics — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J.

¶3

SUMMARY SUIT NO.2214 OF 1998

¶4

Union Bank of India ..Plaintiff.

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Vimal Fabrics ..Defendant.

¶7

Mr. Jamshed Ansari i/b S. Mahomedbhai & Co. for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendant.

¶8

CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

¶9

2^nd September, 2009.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

The suit has been instituted for the recovery of an amount of Rs.

¶12

6,72,847/- together with interest. The claim arises out of a bill of exchange facility granted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant. The case of the Plaintiff is that Orbit Polyester Limited which was a constituent of the Plaintiff drew two bills of exchange / hundis bearing No.226 and 227 in

¶13

the sum of Rs.2,49,951/- and Rs.2,32,713/- which were accepted by the Defendant. The bills of exchange were dated 3^rd June, 1996 and were payable 90 days after date. The bills of exchange were drawn in connection with the supply of goods to the Defendant which was

¶14

¶15

acknowledged under delivery challans dated 1^st June, 1996. Both the bills of exchange came to be dishonoured by the Defendant on presentation. The statement of accounts of the First Defendant has been duly certified under the Bankers Books of Evidence Act and reflects the amounts payable to the Defendant.

¶16

The Defendant has been served with the writ of summons but has not entered appearance. The claim of the Plaintiff has therefore not been controverted. The Plaintiff has filed an affidavit of evidence of its Senior Manager who verifies the correctness of what is stated therein. A compilation of documents has also been filed. The affidavit contains a recital of the salient facts which have been noted in the earlier part of this judgment. The claim has been duly proved on the basis of the affidavit and the evidence on the record. The suit shall accordingly stand decreed as prayed with the modification that the Plaintiff will be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the suit until payment or realization.

¶17

Union Bank of India v. Vimal Febrics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Vimal Febrics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Pramila R. Dalal Vs Bipin Ratilal Dalal and Ors.

The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs M/S. Burdwan Textiles and Anr.

Louis Pereira Vs Darisa Builders and Ors.

Arunkumar Poddar Vs Mrs. Kiran G.Nemani

Omer Hasan Wadhwa Vs Gerald Miochael Misquitta and Anr.

L.I.C.Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Madhu Milan Syntex Ltd.