RAIGAD CONCRETE INDUSTRIES Vs. ICICI BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Alibaug decreeing the usual bank suit filed by the first respondent against the appellants and the other respondents to recover the amounts due under various credit facilities granted by it to the first appellant.

(2.) The appellants were defendant Nos. 1 and 2. Respondent No. 1 was the plaintiff. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are individuals and were defendant Nos. 3 to 7. Appellant No. 2 and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are and in any event were at the material time partners of appellant No. 1. Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 are guarantors.

(3.) The scope of this appeal is very limited. Mr. Godbole, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant's, limited his challenge to the judgment of the trial Court to two grounds. He submitted that the first respondent was not entitled to recover the amounts due to it in view of it having already recovered amounts under the DICGC scheme. He also challenged the rate of interest granted by the trial Court contending that this Court ought to exercise its jurisdiction and reduce the rate of interest granted by the trial Court.