Trinity Touch Private Limited v. Svc Cooperative Bank Limited

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. JULY 08, 2019 "AK/gsr".. (corrected & released on 5th August, 2019) (Interest till 30th September, 2019 at 7% is decreed keeping in mind the release date)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 8th July, 2019 + CS(COMM) 1021/2018 TRINITY TOUCH PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Aditi Mohan with Mr. Shidharth Mohan, Advs. Versus SVC COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Adv. along with A.R. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The plaintiff has instituted this suit for recovery of Rs.1,68,63,600/- along with pendente lite and future interest at 18% per annum, from the defendant bank. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff in the plaint, (i) that the plaintiff, from time to time, for the purposes of its business, has been availing credit facility from various banks and financial institutions; (ii) that till January, 2016, the plaintiff was banking with the Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) and was availing various credit facilities therefrom, which were renewable on a year to year basis and were due for renewal in January, 2016; (iii) that sometime in June, 2015, the plaintiff required certain additional facilities and was approached by the defendant in the month of December, 2015; (iv) the defendant, vide letter dated 30th January, 2016, sanctioned in favour of the plaintiff facilities which were earlier being availed of by the plaintiff from IOB and after including additional credit facilities required by the plaintiff; (v) the defendant, vide said letter sanctioned credit facilities to the tune of Rs.43.88 crores in favour of the plaintiff; (vi) pursuant to the aforesaid sanction, the credit facilities were disbursed to the plaintiff; (vii) the defendant in the sanction letter aforesaid had included various penal clauses which had not been discussed with and agreed to by the plaintiff; (viii) that the sanction letter was due for renewal in the month of January, 2017; (ix) the plaintiff, vide letter dated 29th June, 2016 requested the defendant for amendment of the terms of the sanction letter with respect to pre-closure charges and pre-closure penalty and requested the defendant to waive off/amend the same; another letter dated 5th October, 2016 was also sent in this regard; (x) the plaintiff, on 20th January, 2017 i.e. prior to the expiry of the sanction letter dated 30th January, 2016, submitted a fresh enhancement-cum-renewal proposal to the defendant and again requested for waiver/amendment of condition no.13 qua prepayment/pre-closure charges; (xi) however, till 31st January, 2017, the defendant neither renewed the credit facilities nor responded to the renewal-cum-enhancement proposal dated 20th January, 2017 of the plaintiff; (xii) the credit facilities stood terminated with effect from 30th January, 2017 by efflux of time as there were neither any extension nor any renewal of the earlier sanction letter and which was to be done on or before 31st January, 2017; (xiii) the defendant, on 16th February, 2017 sought a response to certain queries from the plaintiff in connection with the enhancement-cum-renewal sought by the plaintiff and the plaintiff duly replied to the same on 20th February, 2017 itself; (xiv) the plaintiff also wrote letters dated 1st March, 2017 and 10th March, 2017 in this regard including for waiver of processing of prepayment / pre-closure charges; (xv) the plaintiff, vide e-mail dated 14th March, 2017 informed the defendant that the plaintiff was no longer inclined to renew its credit facilities and requested the defendant for closure of credit facility and release of collateral securities; the said request was reiterated on 16th March, and 18th March, 2017; (xvi) to the shock and surprise of the plaintiff, the defendant unilaterally renewed the credit facilities vide e-mail dated 18th March, 2017 and also arbitrarily and illegally debited an amount of Rs.17,25,000/- towards processing charges, for renewal-cum-enhancement of credit facilities and informed the plaintiff that the sanction letter will be shared shortly; (xvii) the plaintiff having already on 14th March, 2017 informed th