JUDGMENT

Lokeshwar Prasad, J.

1. The plaintiff, named above, has filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs. 1.72,845.39 against the defendants averring that the plaintiff Bank is a body Corporate, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its Central office at Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Bombay with local Head Office at 11, Parliament Street, New Delhi and amongst others a branch office at East Patel Nagar, New Delhi, under the control of the local Head Office situated at Parliament Street, New Delhi and that Shri S K. Chowdhary, Branch Manager/Principal Officer of the plaintiff Bank is duly authorised to sign and verify the plaint and to file the present suit on behalf of the plaintiff in terms of General Regulations, 1955, made by the Reserve Bank of India in exercise of powers conferred by Sub- section 50 (3) of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, with the previous sanction of the Central Government read with the notifications published in the Gazette of India dated the 26th September, 1955 and 26th August, 1972.

1.1. It is alleged that defendant No. 1 approached the plaintiff Bank and made an application dated the 3rd January, 1982 for medium term loan of Rs. 3,38,000/- for the purchase of two Tata Diesel Chassis. It is averred that defendant No. 1 promised to pay 25% of the total cost and the remaining amount was to be paid in 36 equal monthly instalments with interest @ 15% per annum.

1.2. The plaintiff Bank acceded to the above request of the defendant No. 1 and granted a medium term loan of Rs. 1,71,000/- on 2nd February, 1982 with interest @ 15% per annum. The above said loan was repayable in 36 equal monthly instalments besides payment of 25% of the total cost at the initial stage. Defendant No.2 stood as surety for the repayment of the loan amount to the plaintiff Bank. Both the defendants, in consideration of the loan amount, executed the agreement for medium term loan against hypothecation of vehicles and machinery, letter of undertaking and third party guarantee agreement on 2nd February, 1982.

1.3. It is alleged that defendants have committed serious breaches and did not adhere to the financial discipline, did not pay the monthly instalments together with interest as per the repayment schedule agreed upon by the defendants and despite repeated requests the defendants failed to regularize their account and pay the outstanding dues of the plaintiff Bank together with interest. The plaintiff Bank addressed registered letters which was duly received by the defendants but even then they failed to repay the loan amount to the plaintiff Bank. The plaintiff Bank also got served a legal notice on the defendants and in response to the legal notice defendant No. 1 paid only a sum of Rs. 19,242/- on 10th January, 1987.

1.4. As per the case of the plaintiff Bank, on the date of the filing of the suit, a sum of Rs. 1,72,845.39 is due from the defendants with interest calculated @ 15 % P.A. upto 30th June, 1987. The liability of the defendants is joint and several. It is alleged that the plaintiff Bank is also entitled to recover and take into the possession the Truck bearing Registration No. HRU 2202 pledged as a collateral security with the plaintiff Bank. It is prayed by the plaintiff Bank that a decree for Rs. 1,72,845.39 be passed in favour of the plaintiff Bank and against the defendants jointly and severally with costs and pendente lite and future interest @ 15 % P.A. The plaintiff Bank has also prayed that the Truck bearing No. HRU 2202 pledged with the plaintiff Bank, be ordered to be attached and be auctioned by public auction and the sale proceeds thereof be deposited with the Court till the decision of the suit

2. The defendants have resisted the claim of the plaintiff Bank. In the written statement, filed on behalf of defendants, the defendants have taken preliminary objection to the effect that the defendants were made to sign a number of blank printed unfilled and undated do