Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited -Versus- Mr. A

IN THE ARTHA RIN ADALAT, 3RD COURT AT DHAKA

ARTHA RIN SUIT NO. ___ OF ________

Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited

Mohakhali Branch

Pacific Centre

14, Mohakhali C/A

Dhaka-1212

PLAINTIFF

-Versus-

1. Mr. A

H # 49, Road # 13

Block-D

Banani, Dhaka

2. Mrs. B

Wife of Mr. A

H # 49, Road # 13

Block-D

Banani, Dhaka

DEFENDANTS

SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY SUIT VALUED AT TK. 3,71,152.00 (TAKA THREE LAC SEVENTY ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO AND PAISA FIFTY SIX) ONLY AS ON_30.09.2006.

The plaintiff above-named most respectfully states as

FOLLOWS:

01. That the plaintiff is a banking company incorporated under the relevant Companies Act. It carries on banking business within the territory of Bangladesh through its various branches including the Mohakhali Branch, Dhaka as stated in the cause title (hereinafter referred to as the “plaintiff bank”).

02. That the defendant No.1 is a businessman by his profession and is the borrower. The defendant No. 2 stood as guarantor securing against the loan availed by the defendant No.1.The defendant’s addresses in the cause title are correct to the best of the plaintiff bank’s knowledge.

03. That in the course of business, the defendant No. 1 opened an account being No. 34003042 on 03.05.1992 with the plaintiff bank. Thereupon at the request of the defendant No.1, plaintiff bank on 16.08.1998 sanctioned Time Loan facility of Tk. 2.95 lac (Taka two lac ninety five thousand) only in favour of the defendant No. 1 with a validity up to one year i.e. 12.08.1999.

04. That the defendant No. 1 availed the credit facility in full but failed to adjust the outstanding liabilities as per the terms of the sanction letter dated 16.08.1998. The validity of the aforesaid facility was expired leaving almost the entire amount unadjusted by the defendant No.1.

05. That thereafter at the request of the defendant No. 1 the plaintiff bank on 01.12.1999 and 30.12.2000 rescheduled the said credit facility on condition inter alia that the defendant No. 1 would pay the outstanding amount of Tk. 1.68 lac by monthly instalments basis.

06. That the aforesaid facility was secured as follow:

a) Execution of personal guarantees by the defendant Nos. 1 and 2;

b) Execution of usual charge documents, including but not limited to Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Agreement, Letter of Continuity, Letter of Revival etc.

07. That the defendant No. 1 purposely defaulted in making payment under the terms of the aforesaid rescheduled arrangements. The plaintiff bank thereupon from time to time sent series of reminders to the defendant No.1, including the letters dated 15.09.2004, 12.12.2004, 05.06.2005, 25.07.2005, 20.08.2005 03.10.2005, 27.11.2005, 13.12.2005 and 23.01.2006 requesting the defendants to adjust the liabilities, but the defendants neither bothered to adjust the outstanding amount nor took any step towards adjustment of the same.

08. That the defendant Nos. 1 & 2 instead of adjusting their liabilities with the plaintiff bank vide their letters dated 13.08.1998, 12.05.2004, 31.08.2005 and 26.12.2005 committed to adjust the outstanding liabilities within a short period, but of no avail.

09. That meanwhile being displeased with the reluctance of the defendant No.1 in liquidating the over dues, the plaintiff bank through their lawyer has cause served legal notice dated 01.11.2006 upon the defendants requesting to adjust their liabilities with the plaintiff bank within 15 (fifteen) days of the receipt of the said notice, with a note that failing which legal action would be initiated for recovery of the plaintiff bank’s dues.

10. That it is apparent from negative attitude of the defendants that they have been evading liquidating the long outstanding dues of the defendant No.1 with the plaintiff bank in breach of his obligation under the terms and conditions of the rescheduled arrangements and the sanction letter. The plaintiff bank made repeated reminders to the defendant No. 1 to liquidate its liabilities with the plaintiff bank but the defendant No.1 continued to fail paying any attention to the plaintiff bank in this regard.

11. That the plaintiff bank gave the defendants ample time and opportunity to clear the outstanding liabilities of the defendant No. 1 but the defendants are reluctant in this regard. It is abundantly clear that the defendants would not adjust the plaintiff bank’s dues unless compelled by law. The plaintiff bank cannot wait for an indefinite period for the defendants to adjust the outstanding liabilities of the defendant No. 1 lying with the plaintiff bank. The defendants are wilfully resorting to delaying tactics to avoid repayment of the long outstanding dues. Having no alternative the plaintiff bank is compelled to file this suit against the defendants to realize its legitimate dues. The plaintiff bank states that the defendants are severally and jointly liable to repay the outstanding dues of the defendant No.1 lying with the plaintiff bank.

12. That the outstanding liability of the defendants is of Tk. 3,71,152.56 (Taka three lac seventy one thousand one hundred fifty two and paisa fifty six) only as on 30.09.2006, which the defendants are jointly and/or severally legally liable to pay:

13. That the cause of action to file this suit arose on 03.05.1992 when the defendant No. 1 opened account with the plaintiff bank, on 16.08.1998, 30.09.2000 and 31.12.2001 when the plaintiff bank sanctioned and rescheduled the Time Loan facility to the defendant No. 1, on the various dates when the defendants executed personal guarantees, on the various dates when the defendants executed various charge documents, on the various dates including letters dated 15.09.2004, 12.12.2004, 05.06.2005, 25.07.2005, 20.08.2005 03.10.2005, 27.11.2005, 13.12.2005 and 23.01.2006 when the plaintiff bank requested the defendant No. 1 to adjust the liability, on various dates including letters dated 13.08.1998, 12.05.2004, 31.08.2005 and 26.12.2005 when the defendants acknowledged their liability, on 01.11.2006 when legal notice was served by the plaintiff bank, on each and every date when the defendants continued to default in repaying their outstanding liabilities with the plaintiff and the said cause of action is continuing till date.

14. Thatthe suit is for realisation of a decree for a sum of Tk. 3,71,152.56 (Taka three lac seventy one thousand one hundred fifty two and paisa fifty six) only as on 30.09.2006, of a commercial bank and the said suit is within the jurisdiction of this Court. For the purpose of court fees, the plaintiff bank values the suit at the said amount and pays the ad-valorem court fees on the said amount.

15. That the authorized representative of the plaintiff bank in the instant suit is Mr. Syed Sohail Azad, Senior Principal officer of the plaintiff bank who is well conversant with the facts of the case.

The plaintiff bank, therefore, prays for:

(a) A decree for a sum of Tk. 3,71,152.56 (Taka three lac seventy one thousand one hundred fifty two and paisa fifty six) only as on 30.09.2006, in favour of the plaintiff bank and against the defendants jointly and/or severally;

(b) A decree for interest at the rate stipulated in the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 from the date of filing the suit till the date of decree and from the date of decree till realization of the decretal amount;

(c) A personal decree against all the defendants;

(d) A decree for the entire costs of the Suit;

(e) Any other relief(s) to which the plaintiff bank is entitled in law and equity.

And for this act of kindness, the plaintiff bank as in duty bound shall ever pray.

SCHEDULE

{Schedule under section 8(2) Ka Artha Rin Adalat Ain 2003}

Description of Loan & amount outstanding

Nature of Facility Limit

(in Tk.)

Loan amount availed (in Tk.) Interest/others

(in Tk.)

Sub-total

(Principal +

Interest

+

Others

(in Tk.)

Amount repaid as on

30.09.2006

(in Tk.)

Outstanding amount as on

30.09.2006

(in Tk.)

Time Loan 2.95 lac 2,16,540.44 1,55,102.12 3,71,152.56 Nil 3,71,152.56
Total 3,71,152.56
A F F I D A V I T

I, _____________________, son of _____________ of Arab Bangladesh Bank Limited, Mohakhali Branch, Pacific Centre,14, Mohakhali C/A, Dhaka-1212, aged about _____ years, by faith ______________, Nationality Bangladeshi by birth, profession service, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as follows:

1. That I am the officer of the plaintiff bank of this plaint and well conversant with the facts of the case and competent to swear this Affidavit.

2. That the statements of facts made in this application are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and rests are submissions before this Hon’ble Court and in witness whereof I swear this affidavit and signed below on this the ______day of___________, ________________ at _________ a.m. before the Commissioner of affidavit.

DEPONENT
The deponent is known to me and

identified by me.

ADVOCATE