Order 11

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 15 CS (COMM) 236/24
Icici Bank Ltd Vs. Nitin Kumar
22.08.2025
Present : Sh. Vikas Chabbra, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff (through VC).
None for the defendant (defendant already exparte).
At the stage of the exparte final arguments, the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff
had filed applications under Order 6 Rule 17 r/w section 151 of CPC for seeking
amendment in the plaint, an application under Order 11 Rule 1 (5 ) of CPC and another
application under Order 18 Rule 17 r/w section 151 of CPC, the notices of the said
applications were ordered to be served to the defendant by way of publication in the
newspaper “The Statesman”. The notices were served to the defendant by way of
publication in the newspaper The Statesman in it’s edition dated 18.02.2025 for
29.03.2025 and on dated 29.03.2025, I had gone to attend a National Conference on
Environment at Vigyan Bhawan at New Delhi, so, the Reader posted in this court had
adjourned the matter for 03.05.2025. The perusal of the record reveals even on dated
29.03.2025, no one had appeared on behalf of the defendant. On dated 03.05.2025, I
had gone to attend National Seminar in the National Judicial Academy at Bhopal, so,
the Reader posted in this court had adjourned the matter for 05.07.2025 and even on
dated 03.05.2025, no one had appeared on behalf of the defendant.
Even on dated 05.07.2025, no one had appeared on behalf of the
defendant till 02:30 PM and the matter was adjourned for 12.08.2025 for awaiting the
defendant and also for filing replies to the said applications by the defendant. On dated
12.08.2025, no one had appeared on behalf of any of the parties. So, the matter was
adjourned for today.
Today, despite of repeated calls since morning till 01:00 PM, no one had
appeared on behalf of the defendant, so, the defendant is again proceeded exparte.
Let the counsel for the plaintiff be heard on the application under Order 6
Rule 17 of CPC.
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff on this application, who has
submitted that the initially the defendant had availed the over draft facility of an
amount of Rs. 3,95,000/-, but on dated 28.03.2022, the amount of overdraft facility
was increased as Rs. 5,90,000/-. He has also submitted that due to some inadvertence,
the plaintiff could not mention the increased amount of overdraft facility of
Rs. 5,90,000/- in para no. 8 and 9 and now the plaintiff wants to incorporate the said
fact of increased of amount of overdraft facility in para no. 8 of the plaint and
similiarly in consequence thereof, the plaintiff also wants to amend para no. 9 of the
plaint, wherein the amount of overdraft facility is required to be incorporated as Rs.
5,90,000/- in place of Rs. 3,95,000/- and prayed for allowing this application.
Having heard to the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. This court has perused
the record and since the defendant has failed to appear despite of service of notices by
way of publication, so, taking into consideration the submissions made by Ld. Counsel
for the plaintiff and in the interest of justice, the application filed by the plaintiff under
Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC stands allowed and amended plaint filed along with this
application is taken on the record.
The plaintiff has also filed an application under Order 11 Rule 1 (5) of
CPC, vide which the plaintiff has sought to place on record the additional documents
viz., the application form for enhancement of facility, facility details, ICICI Bank
Direct Debit Mandate form. The Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff submit that these
documents are essential for proper adjudication of the case, as in these documents, the
enhanced amount of facility of Rs. 5,90,000/- is also mentioned. He has also submitted
that due to some inadvertence, these documents regarding the enghanced amount of
facility could not be filed with the suit and prayed for allowing the plaintiff to file
these additional documents.
Having heard to the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. This court has perused the
record and since the defendant has failed to appear despite of service of notices by way
of publication, so, taking into consideration the submissions made by Ld. Counsel for the
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
plaintiff and in the interest of justice, the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 11
Rule 1(5)of CPC, vide which the the plaintiff has sought to place on record the above
said additional documents also stands allowed and the abovesaid additional dcouments
are taken on the record.
The matter is also fixed for consideration on another application under
Order 18 Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC filed by the plaintiff, vide which, the
plaintiff has sought to recall the AR of the plaintiff for his examination.
I have heard the the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff, who has submitted that
since at the time of the filing of the suit, the fact of enhanced amount of overdraft
facility of Rs. 5,90,000/- was not incorporated in the plaint and now by way of
amendment sought by the plaintiff, the plaintiff has incorporated the said amount in
para no. 8 and 9 of the plaint and in the changed circumstances, the AR of the plaintiff,
who was earlier examined as PW-1 is required to be recalled for his examination and
prayed for allowing the application.
Having heard to the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. This court has perused the
record and since the defendant has failed to appear despite of service of notices by way
of publication. Since today this court has allowed the application filed by the plaintiff
under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC and another application under Order 11 Rule 1(5) of
CPC and in the given circumstances, the recalling to the AR of the plaintiff has
become essential, so, taking into consideration the submissions made by Ld. Counsel for
the plaintiff and in the interest of justice, the application filed by the plaintiff under Order
18 Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC also stands allowed.
At this stage, the Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff seeks adjournment to
examine AR of the plaintiff.
Matter stands adjourned for exparte evidence of the plaintiff.
To come up on 28.10.2025.
(PAWAN KUMAR MATTO)
DISTRICT JUDGE
(COMMERCIAL COURT)-04,
SHAHDARA, KKD,
Delhi/22.08.2025
-- 3 of 3 --