Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. It is averred that defendant No. 1 is a sole proprietorship concern and defendant No. 2 is its proprietor. The defendants were having a current account bearing no. 50503 since 16.01.1996 and savings account bearing No. 22961 since 09.08.95, with the plaintiff at its Kamla Nagar branch. The defendants approached the plaintiff bank on 11.06.1996, for grant of a temporary overdraft facility for a sum of Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) on usual terms of interest, for a period of three weeks.

4. It is averred that defendant No. 2, who was maintaining a saving account No. 22961 with the plaintiff, also applied for issuance of a credit card, which was being issued by the plaintiff under the name of 'India Card'. An India Card bearing No. 54203430 011288607 was issued to defendant No. 2 for which he is liable to pay membership fee and interest on the amount overdrawn by him by using the card at various merchant establishments. The defendants deposited a sum of Rs. 13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand only) on 23.03.1997 towards repayment of temporary overdraft loan facility, Rs. 1,600/- (Rupees One Thousand Six Hundred only) on 22.10.1997 and Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) on 03.11.1998 towards repayment of amount overdrawn by using the India Card.

5. It is stated that the defendants failed to repay the loan granted by plaintiff despite repeated requests and finally a telegraphic demand legal notice was issued to the defendants on 31.05.1999, but to no avail. A sum of Rs. 1,03,820-35/- (One Lac Three Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty rupees and Thirty five paise) is due towards the defendants in the temporary overdraft account and Rs. 34,507-09 (Thirty four thousand five hundred seven rupees and nine paise) is due in the India Card account, as on 02.06.1999. The defendants are liable to pay a total sum of Rs. 1,38,327-44/- (One Lac Thirty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Seven rupees and forty four paise only) along with pendente-lite and future interest @ 17.5% per annum and 30% per annum on the temporary overdraft amount and amount due in the India Card account respectively.

6. The defendants were granted unconditional leave to defend the suit vide Order dated 15.01.2002. In their written statement, the defendants raised various preliminary objections inter-alia contending that the suit has been instituted through an unauthorized person, who is a stranger to the transaction and not conversant with the facts of the case. The suit is bad on account of misjoinder of causes of action as the suit is based on two distinct loan transactions, one the temporary overdraft loan facility which is stated to have been granted to M/s Shiva Construction and the other overdraft on India Card which is stated to have been granted to Mr. Anil Kumar Choudhary. The suit is barred by limitation and the plaint is liable to be rejected in terms of Order VII Rule 11 CPC as there is no privity of contract between the parties.