1

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) THANE

AT THANE

REGULAR CIVIL SUIT NO. _________ OF 2020

Yes Bank, )

a Body Corporate constituted under the )

Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer )

of Undertakings ) Act, 1980 having its Head )

Office at Yes bank Tower, Elphinstone , )

Mumbai- 400 013 and having its Thane (W) )

Branch at Shop Nos. 2 & 5, Mangal Murti )

Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Ram Maruti Road, )

Naupada, Thane (West), through its Assistant )

Manager Mr. ABC ) …. Plaintiff.

Versus

1. M/s. M. S. Telecom Systems & Services, )

a sole proprietary firm carrying on the business )

at Kapurbawdi, Thane (West) – 400607. )

2. Mr. Anand Maruti Patil, )

of Indian Inhabitant residing at Galaxy Packers, )

Ghatla Village Road, Near Amar Cinema, )

Jani Industrial Estate, Chembur, )

Mumbai – 400071. ) ….. Defendants.

WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF

OF DEFENDANT NOS. 1 AND 2
 2

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR :-

1. The Defendants submit that the suit filed by the Plaintiff is

misconceived, groundless, bad in law and not maintainable of on

following ground which are set out without prejudice to the rest of

the written submission.

2. The suit does not disclose any cause of action against the Defendants.

3. The Plaintiff has suppressed vital material fact from this Hon’ble

court and only on this sole ground to be treated as preliminary issue

and the suit should be dismissed with compensatory costs.

4. Without prejudice to the foregoing submission and without prejudice

to each other, the Defendants set out some of the relevant facts

herein below for the consideration of this Hon’ble court.

On the aforesaid background the Defendants offer their version as

under:-

(i) With reference to Para no. 1, 2, and 3, it is matter of record hence it

does not require any comments.

(ii) With reference to Para no. 4, the Plaintiff had promised that they

would give a moratorium period of 6 months and thereafter the

installments would start, however, the Plaintiffs went back on their

promise and started demanding installments from the very first

month, which was nearly impossible as the business was very new

and in every business there are teething problems for the first year

and it takes time to establish a brand and earn the revenues.

(iii) With reference to Para no. 5, it was admitted and confirmed by the

Plaintiff bank at the time of sanction of the loan, that they would
 3

disburse a sum of Rs. 5 lakh to these defendants, it was very much

shocking and surprising to note that. So many payments were being

demanded by the bank towards the miscellaneous expenses, which

these defendants never prejudged and ultimately the business for

which the loan was being raised as working capital, could not be

fulfilled and ultimately the account became NPA.

(iv) With reference to Para no. 6 and 7, the account became highly

irregular in operations because the purpose for which these defendants

used to keep the balance, could not apportioned to the installment of

the Term Loan account and the same was being adjusted towards

overdue interest and penal charges.

(v) With reference to Para no. 8, these defendants strictly deny that they

received the various letters and notices mentioned by the plaintiff

bank. Hence, they are put to strict proof thereof.

(vi) With reference to Para no. 9, it is highly impractical and impossible

for a borrower to repay entire loan amount along with interest within

15 days, whereas these defendants were unable to pay the regular

installments. Hence, the notice dated 20/12/2018 for recall of loan was

absolutely unjustified and illegal.

(vii) With reference to Para no. 10 and 11, the amount of claim

mentioned by the plaintiff of Rs. 4,97,877/- as per the particulars of

claim is absolutely incorrect and illegal. Hence, these defendants are

not liable to pay the plaintiff the amount, interest and cost as prayed

in the present suit. The plaintiff is put to strict proof thereof.

(viii) With reference to Para no. 12 to 15, the plaintiff claim is absolutely

incorrect and illegal, therefore the hypothecated securities cannot be

sold for recovery of the amount of claim and for that, this plaintiff is
 4

put to strict proof thereof, hence the relief claimed by the plaintiff

are legally not maintainable and are liable to be rejected.

(ix) With reference to Para no. 16 to 23, it is a matter of record, hence

it does not require any comments.

(x) However, the plaintiff is under an obligation to disclose on record

the extent and value of mortgaged property with them as on the date

of sanction and disbursement of loan, as on the date of issuance of

legal notice of demand and as on the date of institution of present

proceedings before the Hon’ble court. A reference in this regard is

being made to section 133, 134, 139, 140 and 141 of The Indian

Contract Act, 1872, which casts upon a duty on the plaintiff to

preserve the security furnished by the Borrower. However, the suit

filed by the plaintiff, does not disclose as to what is the status and

the extent of the security furnished by the borrower. In absence of

these averments, the suit filed by the plaintiff bank, is liable to be

rejected as not disclosing any cause of action.

(xi) It is therefore just and necessary in the interest of natural justice and

equality before the law, that the prayers as prayed by the plaintiff

bank in prayer clause (a) to (h) are legally maintainable hence the

same should be rejected.

Dated this ___ day of April, 2020.

Advocate for the Defendants. Defendants

 5

VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Anand Maruti Patil, aged about 44 years, the above written

statement dealing with the merits are true and correct to my knowledge as

per the records being maintained by the Defendants in normal course of

business and as such believed to be true and correct.

Declared at Thane )

This___ day of April, 2020 ) Defendants.

Advocate for the defendants

 6

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) THANE

AT THANE

REGULAR CIVIL SUIT NO. _________ OF 2020

Yes Bank, …. Plaintiff.

Versus

M/s. M. S. Telecom Systems & Services

& Anr, .…Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF WRITTEN STATEMENT

OF DEFENDANTS

I, Mr. Anand Maruti Patil aged about 44 years, Occupation –

Business, the Defendants do hereby solemnly affirm and say as under ;

1. Whatever is stated in the aforesaid paras of this Written statement is

true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief

and I believe the same to be true and correct.

2. I say that I have stated all the facts and our defense as mentioned

in my Written Statement and hence to avoid repetition of the

contents thereon. I hereby adopt, re-iterate and confirm the same and

the contents of the written Statement may be read as part and parcel

of this Affidavit and be Exhibited and read in evidence.

3. I say that I am deposing this affidavit in support of my say and

Written Statement and the contents of the Written Statement and this

Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge,

information and belief.

 7

Solemnly affirmed at Thane )

Dated this ____day of April, 2020 ) Before Me,

Advocate for the Defendants.

VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Anand Maruti Patil, aged about 44 years, of the Defendant

abovenamed, solemnly affirm that what is stated in the foregoing affidavit

is true and correct and I believe the same to be true.

Solemnly declared at Thane )

Dated this ___ day of April, 2020 ) Before me.

Advocate for the Defendants.

 8

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (J.D.), THANE

AT THANE

REGULAR CIVIL SUIT NO. _________ OF 2020

Yes Bank …. Plaintiff.

Versus

M/s. M. S. Telecom Systems

& Services and Anr. ….. Defendants.

WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF

OF DEFENDANT NOS. 1 AND 2
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this ____ day of April, 2020

.
Advocate for the Defendants,