KULBHUSHAN SACHDEV Vs. ICICI BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant (defendant no.2 in the suit) has filed the present appeal impugning the judgment and decree dtd. 4/8/2023 (hereafter the impugned judgment) delivered by the learned Commercial Court decreeing an amount of Rs.3,44,854.00 along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit (that is, from 3/7/2021) till the realization of the said amount. Additionally, the learned Commercial Court had also awarded costs in favour of respondent no.1 (plaintiff in the suit and hereafter referred to as the Bank).

(2.) The Bank had instituted the said suit [CS(COMM) No.2157/2021] seeking recovery of Rs.3,44,854.00 along with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The Bank claimed that respondent no.2 (defendant no.1 in the suit and hereafter the Company) had approached it for grant of a loan of a sum of Rs.6,23,000.00 for purchasing a vehicle ' Maruti Swift Dzire VDI. It claimed that the Company had executed a Credit Facility Application as well as Car Loan Agreement for availing the said loan. The said loan was granted and was secured by the vehicle purchased by the Company. The said loan along with interest was required to be repaid in 68 (sixty-eight) equated monthly installments (EMIs) of Rs.13,008.00each with one EMI to be paid in advance.

(3.) The Bank did not take any steps for pre-institution mediation and filed the suit along with an urgent application for appointment of a receiver ex-parte. Although, the said application was allowed, the Bank did not recover the vehicle. The appellant was not arrayed as a defendant in the suit as originally filed. However, the Bank filed an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking to implead the appellant as defendant no.2 in the suit on the ground that he was a co-applicant along with the Company for availing the auto loan. The learned Commercial Court issued notice of the impleadment application on 12/7/2022. The said application for impleadment was not contested and accordingly, it was allowed by an order dtd. 2/12/2022. By the said order, the appellant was also granted time to file his Written Statement. Thereafter, the amended memo of parties filed by the Bank was also taken on record. However, neither the appellant nor the Company filed their written statements and were proceeded against ex parte. Absent any contest, the learned Commercial Court accepted the Bank's claim and passed the impugned judgment and decree. SUBMISSIONS